Re: [PATCH] usb: typec: ucsi: Do not call ACPI _DSM method for UCSI read operations

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Heikki,

On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 02:21:30PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2024 at 08:32:53PM +0200, Christian A. Ehrhardt wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Heikki,
> > 
> > On Mon, Sep 09, 2024 at 12:20:47PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > > Hi Saranya, Christian,
> > > 
> > > On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 11:47:42AM +0000, Gopal, Saranya wrote:
> > > > Hi Heikki, Christian,
> > > > 
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Christian A. Ehrhardt <lk@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2024 3:40 AM
> > > > > To: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Cc: Gopal, Saranya <saranya.gopal@xxxxxxxxx>; linux-
> > > > > usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Regupathy,
> > > > > Rajaram <rajaram.regupathy@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: typec: ucsi: Do not call ACPI _DSM method
> > > > > for UCSI read operations
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hi Heikki, Hi Saranya,
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 11:44:33AM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 02:13:42PM +0530, Saranya Gopal wrote:
> > > > > > > ACPI _DSM methods are needed only for UCSI write operations
> > > > > and for reading
> > > > > > > CCI during RESET_PPM operation. So, remove _DSM calls from
> > > > > other places.
> > > > > > > While there, remove the Zenbook quirk also since the default
> > > > > behavior
> > > > > > > now aligns with the Zenbook quirk. With this change,
> > > > > GET_CONNECTOR_STATUS
> > > > > > > returns at least 6 seconds faster than before in Arrowlake-S
> > > > > platforms.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Saranya Gopal <saranya.gopal@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Maybe this should be marked as a fix. I think this covers:
> > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/20240829100109.562429-2-
> > > > > lk@xxxxxxx/
> > > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > Heikki,
> > > > I see that Christian's other patch is marked as a fix already (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/20240906065853.637205-1-lk@xxxxxxx/T/#u). 
> > > 
> > > The other part still needs a fix.
> > 
> > Well technically not. I've established with the reporter of
> > 	https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=219108
> > that the immediate regression (keyboard on ASUS laptop not working) is
> > fixed with the ucsi.c patch (that got your Reviewed-By today) alone.
> > 
> > UCSI on the ASUS laptop is still broken but it always was, AFAICT.
> > Thus I'd like to push the above mentioned patch as the fix for
> > the regression.
> > 
> > The reporter was very helpful and responsive in testing and
> > I intend to look into the reason why UCSI does not work after
> > that with the reporter's help.
> > 
> > > On Thu, 5 Sept 2024 at 20:00, Christian A. Ehrhardt <lk@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > 
> > > >
> > > > Hi again,
> > > >
> > > > attached is version 4 of the patch. This will not fix the error
> > > > messages we talked about (I have to think about this some more).
> > > >
> > > > It should fix your keyboard issues, though.
> > > >
> > > > Heikki had another request to change the patch and it would be
> > > > cool if you could test this version to make sure that it really
> > > > fixes your immediate problem.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Christian
> > > >
> > 
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU8: Topology domain 1 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU8: Topology domain 2 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU8: Topology domain 3 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU8: Topology domain 4 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU8: Topology domain 5 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU8: Topology domain 6 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU9: Topology domain 1 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU9: Topology domain 2 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU9: Topology domain 3 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU9: Topology domain 4 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU9: Topology domain 5 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU9: Topology domain 6 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU10: Topology domain 1 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU10: Topology domain 2 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU10: Topology domain 3 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU10: Topology domain 4 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU10: Topology domain 5 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU10: Topology domain 6 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU11: Topology domain 1 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU11: Topology domain 2 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU11: Topology domain 3 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU11: Topology domain 4 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU11: Topology domain 5 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU11: Topology domain 6 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU12: Topology domain 1 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU12: Topology domain 2 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU12: Topology domain 3 shift 7 != 6
> > > [    0.019168] [Firmware Bug]: CPU12: Topology domain 4 shift 7 != 6
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > > So, can this patch go in as it is?
> > > > Please let me know if I need to resubmit with any changes.
> > > 
> > > If you prefer that we go with Christian's patch to fix the issue
> > > - which is fine by me - you need to rebase this on top of his patch in
> > > any case. So you will need to resend this either way.
> > > 
> > > Christian would you mind resending that second patch after all where
> > > you take the Zenbook quirk into use on that ASUS system?
> > 
> > See above. The immediate regression is fixed with the already
> > reviewed patch alone. The remaining issue with UCSI on the ASUS
> > laptop not working can be fixed separately.
> > 
> > I'd rather base a fix for UCSI on the ASUS laptop onto Saranya's
> > patch because I think that patch is the correct thing to do.
> > 
> > Unfortunately, testing by the original reporter was inconclusive
> > wrt. this. I have one report of a test run with the (classical)
> > ASUS quirk (and the other patch) where UCSI on the ASUS laptop
> > did work. Patch version v1 was the result of this.
> > 
> > With Saranya's patch and my patch to ucsi.c the regression was gone
> > but UCSI did _not_ work.
> > 
> > As this does not make sense because Saranya's patch should be
> > equivalent to the ASUS zenbook quirk. Thus this needs more
> > investigation and dropping the zenbook quirk patch looks like the
> > correct thing to do.
> > 
> > > Let's make that as the actual fix for the issue. Maybe it's more clear
> > > that way.
> > 
> > Please let me know if you disagree and I can resend the ASUS quirk
> > patch.
> 
> No, that's not necessary. So we go ahead with this patch from Saranya
> as is - we don't caim it fixes anything. Then you guys continue
> debugging that UCSI not working on the ASUS laptop issue. If I got
> this correct then:

Exactly. And
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240906065853.637205-1-lk@xxxxxxx/
proceeds but is independent.

> Reviewed-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> If there was nothing else, then my appologies for all the noise.

No need to. The state of things was confusing and this type of
"noise" is your job as a maintainer :-)

Thanks for the review.

Best regards,
Christian





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Media]     [Linux Input]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Old Linux USB Devel Archive]

  Powered by Linux