On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 08:28:08PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> On 22.03.2024 17:18, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 10:00:27PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> >> On 21.03.2024 18:33, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 12:59:59PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> >>>> On 21.03.2024 12:20, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 10:26:06PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> >>>>>> On 20.03.2024 22:07, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 09:21:34PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 20.03.2024 16:59, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 03:56:29PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
...
> >>>>>>>>> grep 0000001b /sys/kernel/debug/pinctrl/*/pins
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> pin 3 (GPPC_B_3) 3:INTC1057:00 GPIO 0x80100102 0x0000001b 0x00000000 [LOCKED tx]
> >>>>>>>> pin 82 (GPP_F_7_EMMC_CMD) 135:INTC1057:00 GPIO 0x44000300 0x0000001b 0x00000000 [LOCKED full, ACPI]
> >>>>>>>> pin 182 (GPPC_C_13) 269:INTC1057:00 GPIO 0x44000300 0x0000001b 0x00000000 [LOCKED full, ACPI]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I was not correct, the value to grep is '0000[0-3][0-9a-f]1b' as there pull
> >>>>>>> up/down can be enabled.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Result is the same
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Nevertheless from the above the pin 3 is one that is enabled as GPIO input with
> >>>>>>> RTE 27 and direct IRQ. If it's a culprit, try to add in the pinctrl-intel.c at
> >>>>>>> the end of .probe:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> {
> >>>>>>> void __iomem *padcfg0;
> >>>>>>> u32 value;
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> padcfg0 = intel_get_padcfg(pctrl, 3, PADCFG0);
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> value = readl(padcfg0);
> >>>>>>> value |= PADCFG0_GPIOTXDIS;
> >>>>>>> value |= PADCFG0_GPIORXDIS;
> >>>>>>> writel(value, padcfg0);
> >>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If it helps, it will show the BIOS bug (likely).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Wow, this indeed fixes the issue for me. Thanks a lot!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Wow! Glad to hear this.
> >>>>> (Side note, can you test the patch against idma64 I sent yesterday?
> >>>>> Tested-by tag will be appreciated!)
> >>>>>
> >>>> Done, sent the Tested-by
> >>>
> >>> Thank you!
> >>>
> >>>>> We may try to have the quirk in the kernel, but it might be (quite) tricky
> >>>>> (see the link below).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Can you share `acpidump -o n100-tables.dat` (the file) somewhere?
> >>>>> I would like to see if this pin is anyhow being mentioned in the DSDT.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Attached. Compressed file isn't that big, so hope it's ok to send it
> >>>> as an attachment.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, got it.
> >>>
> >>> Can you also share the output of
> >>>
> >>> 1) `dmesg` (when kernel command line has 'ignore_loglevel apic=debug');
> >> attached
> >>> 2) `lspci -nk -vv`;
> >> attached
> >>> 3) `grep -H 15 /sys/bus/acpi/devices/*/status`?
> >>>
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/ACPI0003:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/ACPI000C:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/ACPI000E:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:4a/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:86/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:87/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:88/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:8a/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:8b/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:8c/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/INT33A1:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/INTC1041:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/INTC1048:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/INTC1057:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/INTC1070:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/INTC1099:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/MSFT0001:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/OVTI01AS:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/OVTID858:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/PNP0103:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/PNP0C09:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/PNP0C0C:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/PNP0C0D:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/PRP00001:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/TXNW3643:00/status:15
> >> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/TXNW3643:01/status:15
> >
> > Can you also add this
> >
> > grep -H 15 /sys/bus/acpi/devices/*/status | while read x; do grep -H . `dirname $x`/path; done
> >
>
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/ACPI0003:00/path:\_SB_.ADP1
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/ACPI000C:00/path:\_SB_.PAGD
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/ACPI000E:00/path:\_SB_.AWAC
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:4a/path:\_SB_.PC00.TCPU
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:86/path:\_SB_.PC00.THC0.TLC1
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:87/path:\_SB_.PC00.THC0.TLC2
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:88/path:\_SB_.PC00.THC0.TLC3
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:8a/path:\_SB_.PC00.THC1.TLC1
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:8b/path:\_SB_.PC00.THC1.TLC2
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/device:8c/path:\_SB_.PC00.THC1.TLC3
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/INT33A1:00/path:\_SB_.PEPD
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/INTC1041:00/path:\_SB_.IETM
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/INTC1048:00/path:\_SB_.PC00.LPCB.H_EC.TFN1
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/INTC1057:00/path:\_SB_.GPI0
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/INTC1070:00/path:\_SB_.HIDD
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/INTC1099:00/path:\_SB_.PC00.LPCB.CWDT
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/MSFT0001:00/path:\_SB_.PC00.LPCB.PS2K
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/OVTI01AS:00/path:\_SB_.PC00.LNK0
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/OVTID858:00/path:\_SB_.PC00.LNK1
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/PNP0103:00/path:\_SB_.PC00.LPCB.HPET
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/PNP0C09:00/path:\_SB_.PC00.LPCB.H_EC
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/PNP0C0C:00/path:\_SB_.PWRB
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/PNP0C0D:00/path:\_SB_.PC00.LPCB.H_EC.LID0
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/PRP00001:00/path:\_SB_.PC00.HDAS.IDA_.SNDW
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/TXNW3643:00/path:\_SB_.PC00.FLM0
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/TXNW3643:01/path:\_SB_.PC00.FLM1
Okay, from these and DSDT I see no active device using GPIO from DSDT.
So, the behaviour you have is definitely is a BIOS bug.
Let me and maybe others think if we can to work this around in the kernel
and if so, how.
> > ?
> >
> >>>>>> For my understanding: Shall we (kernel driver) rely on the BIOS to configure
> >>>>>> GPIO's properly?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, but there are bugs.
> >>>>> You may look, e.g., https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=214749.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Or better assume that GPIO's are in an unknown state on
> >>>>>> driver load and configure them for our needs?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It depends. But usually (> 99% cases) we rely on the firmware.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> IOW: If we assume that other systems may have similar issues, should
> >>>>>> "some driver" use e.g. the pinctrl API to configure relevant pins?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
