Hi,
On 2/4/23 23:15, Darrell Kavanagh wrote:
> Yes, I understand that.
>
> What I mean is that the matrix read from the DSDT by Jonathan's
> amended driver is
>
> 0 -1 0
> 1 0 0
> 0 0 1
>
> and the (correct) matrix created with my new hwdb entry is
>
> 0 1 0
> -1 0 0
> 0 0 1
>
> which is the algebraic transposition (ie reflection in the diagonal)
> of the DSDT one.
>
> In other words, though the DST matrix is wrong, it is wrong in a
> specific way - the rows should be the columns, and vv. I was just
> wondering if this was a DSDT bug that might have been seen elsewhere
> before.
No this does not ring a bell, but the x and y axis being swapped
does seem related to the LCD panel being 90° rotated.
> BTW, there is another matrix in the DSTD, but I can't find the
> associated HID (10EC5280) anywhere (Linux sysfs or Windows Powershell
> system data extract). It's not a correct matrix, though - could it be
> just a bit of redundant code in the DST?
Yes that is likely there often is a bunch of dead stuff DSDT leftover
from other device models.
Regards,
Hans
>
> Darrell
>
> On Sat, 4 Feb 2023 at 21:31, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2/4/23 18:09, Darrell Kavanagh wrote:
>>> I've just noticed that the working mount matrix that I added to my
>>> hwdb is the matrix retrieved from the ACPI ROTM call in the amended
>>> driver, transposed.
>>
>> An other word for the mount matrix would be a rotation matrix,
>> since it defines how the physical sensor is mounted on the PCB
>> in a rotated fashion compared to its standard orientation.
>>
>> The x, y, z axis relationship underling of course does
>> not change by the rotation, so yes all mount matrices
>> are a transposition of the standard:
>>
>> 1, 0, 0 : 0, 1, 0 : 0, 0, 1
>>
>> matrix, that is expected. Where that to not be the case
>> then there would be a bug in the accelerometer driver itself
>> where the driver itself is swapping or inverting axis.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Hans
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 at 18:23, Darrell Kavanagh
>>> <darrell.kavanagh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Finally got a 6.2.0-rc6 kernel built and installed, with the following
>>>> patch, and everything is working as expected.
>>>>
>>>> Moving on now to look at Bastien's suggestion.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Darrell
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/kernel/drm_panel_orientation_quirks.c
>>>> b/kernel/linux-6.2-rc6/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_panel_orientation_quirks.c
>>>> index 3659f04..590bb7b 100644
>>>> --- a/kernel/drm_panel_orientation_quirks.c
>>>> +++ b/kernel/linux-6.2-rc6/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_panel_orientation_quirks.c
>>>> @@ -304,6 +304,12 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id orientation_data[] = {
>>>> DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_VERSION, "Lenovo ideapad
>>>> D330-10IGM"),
>>>> },
>>>> .driver_data = (void *)&lcd1200x1920_rightside_up,
>>>> + }, { /* Lenovo IdeaPad Duet 3 10IGL5 */
>>>> + .matches = {
>>>> + DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "LENOVO"),
>>>> + DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_VERSION, "IdeaPad Duet 3 10IGL5"),
>>>> + },
>>>> + .driver_data = (void *)&lcd1200x1920_rightside_up,
>>>> }, { /* Lenovo Ideapad D330-10IGL (HD) */
>>>> .matches = {
>>>> DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "LENOVO"),
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 at 17:55, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/1/23 18:50, Darrell Kavanagh wrote:
>>>>>> Thank you. I don't have anything that could be called a big machine.
>>>>>> The fastest processor I have access to is a Core m3-8100Y - that's in
>>>>>> a Chromebook with 4GB memory - it can run Linux in a chroot or
>>>>>> officially in Google's VM. I also have an ancient gen 2 core i5-2410M
>>>>>> machine which is slower than the m3 in theory, but that has 6GB of
>>>>>> memory.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is the kernel build more processor or memory bound?
>>>>>
>>>>> It is mostly processor bound, esp. wtih something like make -j4,
>>>>> make -j16 will start taking some RAM, but with make -j4 I expect you
>>>>> to be fully CPU bound.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Hans
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 at 16:12, Bastien Nocera <hadess@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, 2023-02-01 at 12:00 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2/1/23 11:28, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:40:49 +0000
>>>>>>>>> Darrell Kavanagh <darrell.kavanagh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hello, all.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've finally reached a conclusion on this, after testing all the
>>>>>>>>>> combinations of the patches (with and without reading the acpi
>>>>>>>>>> mounting matrix), window managers (wayland, xorg) and the
>>>>>>>>>> presence or
>>>>>>>>>> not of my custom kernel parms.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What works well is the full set of patches with the custom kernel
>>>>>>>>>> parms and a new hwdb entry for the sensor:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> sensor:modalias:acpi:SMO8B30*:dmi:*:svnLENOVO*:pn82AT:*
>>>>>>>>>> ACCEL_MOUNT_MATRIX=0, 1, 0; -1, 0, 0; 0, 0, 1
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The autorotate then works correctly in wayland and xorg, but for
>>>>>>>>>> xorg,
>>>>>>>>>> the settings say the screen is "portrait left" when in actual
>>>>>>>>>> fact it
>>>>>>>>>> is in standard laptop landscape orientation. Wayland does not
>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>> this problem (I guess because wayland's view of the screen is
>>>>>>>>>> straight
>>>>>>>>>> from the kernel).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Without the hwdb entry, the orientation is 90 degrees out without
>>>>>>>>>> using the acpi matrix and 180 degrees out when using it. I could
>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>> gone either way here with appropriate hwdb entries, but my view
>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> that we *should* be using the matrix.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Added Hans de Goede as he has probably run into more of this mess
>>>>>>>>> than anyone else. Hans, any thoughts on if we are doing something
>>>>>>>>> wrong on kernel side? Or is the matrix just wrong *sigh*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I see below that this laptop has a panel which is mounted 90 degrees
>>>>>>>> rotated, that likely explains why the ACPI matrix does not work.
>>>>>>>> So the best thing to do here is to just override it with a hwdb
>>>>>>>> entries.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> IIRC there are already 1 or 2 other hwdb entries which actually
>>>>>>>> override the ACPI provided matrix because of similar issues.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Linux userspace expects the matrix in this case to be set so that
>>>>>>>> it causes e.g. gnome's auto-rotation to put the image upright
>>>>>>>> even with older gnome versions / mate / xfce which don't know about
>>>>>>>> the panel being mounted 90 degrees.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So e.g. "monitor-sensor" will report left-side-up or right-side-up
>>>>>>>> while the device is actually in normal clamshell mode with the
>>>>>>>> display up-right.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This reporting of left-side-up or right-side-up is actually "correct"
>>>>>>>> looking from the native LCD panel orientation and as mentioned is
>>>>>>>> done for backward compatibility. This is documented here:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/hwdb.d/60-sensor.hwdb#L54
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The way we are handling this is likely incompatible with how Windows
>>>>>>>> handles this special case of 90° rotated screen + ROTM. Or the
>>>>>>>> matrix in the ACPI tables could be just wrong...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think 'ROTM' is defined by MS.
>>>>>>>>> https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/sensors/sensors-acpi-entries
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Right and as such it would be good if we can still add support to
>>>>>>>> it to the sensor driver in question. Because the ROTM info usually
>>>>>>>> is correct and avoids the need for adding more and more hwdb entries.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Note there already is existing support in some other sensor drivers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So we probably need to factor out some helper code for this and share
>>>>>>>> that between sensor drivers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The only thing that concerns me is the need for custom kernel
>>>>>>>>>> parms.
>>>>>>>>>> It would be better if there was a way to avoid this, so that the
>>>>>>>>>> user
>>>>>>>>>> didn't have to mess around with their grub config. Though having
>>>>>>>>>> said
>>>>>>>>>> that, the sensors fix as we have it doesn't make things worse -
>>>>>>>>>> under
>>>>>>>>>> currently released kernels the screen always starts up sideways
>>>>>>>>>> unless
>>>>>>>>>> custom parms are added in grub.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We actually have a quirk mechanism in the kernel for specifying
>>>>>>>> the need for: video=DSI-1:panel_orientation=right_side_up and this
>>>>>>>> will also automatically fix the fbcon orientation, see:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_panel_orientation_quirks.c
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you submit a patch for this upstream please Cc me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And if after that change, and copy/pasting the orientation from the
>>>>>>> DSDT into hwdb the sensor and screen move in the expected ways, then
>>>>>>> maybe stealing the BMC150 driver's
>>>>>>> bmc150_apply_bosc0200_acpi_orientation() might be a good idea.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Once exported through "mount_matrix", iio-sensor-proxy should see it
>>>>>>> and read it without the need for a hwdb entry.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
