Hi Greg, On 5/12/21 10:51 AM, gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > The patch below does not apply to the 5.12-stable tree. > If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm > tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit > id to <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>. This is already in 5.12, but then as commit 538d2dd0b9920334e6596977a664e9e7bac73703 that is the hash it has on my pdx86/fixes branch, where I cherry picked it from my pdx86/for-next branch. The 2728f39dfc720983e2b69f0f1f0c403aaa7c346f hash you tried to cherry-pick is from my pdx86/for-next branch and so this same change showed up (again) in 5.13-rc1 under this hash, sorry about the confusion. Regards, Hans > > thanks, > > greg k-h > > ------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------ > > From 2728f39dfc720983e2b69f0f1f0c403aaa7c346f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 17:35:13 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH] platform/x86: intel-vbtn: Stop reporting SW_DOCK events > > Stop reporting SW_DOCK events because this breaks suspend-on-lid-close. > > SW_DOCK should only be reported for docking stations, but all the DSDTs in > my DSDT collection which use the intel-vbtn code, always seem to use this > for 2-in-1s / convertibles and set SW_DOCK=1 when in laptop-mode (in tandem > with setting SW_TABLET_MODE=0). > > This causes userspace to think the laptop is docked to a port-replicator > and to disable suspend-on-lid-close, which is undesirable. > > Map the dock events to KEY_IGNORE to avoid this broken SW_DOCK reporting. > > Note this may theoretically cause us to stop reporting SW_DOCK on some > device where the 0xCA and 0xCB intel-vbtn events are actually used for > reporting docking to a classic docking-station / port-replicator but > I'm not aware of any such devices. > > Also the most important thing is that we only report SW_DOCK when it > reliably reports being docked to a classic docking-station without any > false positives, which clearly is not the case here. If there is a > chance of reporting false positives then it is better to not report > SW_DOCK at all. > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210321163513.72328-1-hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel-vbtn.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel-vbtn.c > index 8a8017f9ca91..3fdf4cbec9ad 100644 > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel-vbtn.c > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel-vbtn.c > @@ -48,8 +48,16 @@ static const struct key_entry intel_vbtn_keymap[] = { > }; > > static const struct key_entry intel_vbtn_switchmap[] = { > - { KE_SW, 0xCA, { .sw = { SW_DOCK, 1 } } }, /* Docked */ > - { KE_SW, 0xCB, { .sw = { SW_DOCK, 0 } } }, /* Undocked */ > + /* > + * SW_DOCK should only be reported for docking stations, but DSDTs using the > + * intel-vbtn code, always seem to use this for 2-in-1s / convertibles and set > + * SW_DOCK=1 when in laptop-mode (in tandem with setting SW_TABLET_MODE=0). > + * This causes userspace to think the laptop is docked to a port-replicator > + * and to disable suspend-on-lid-close, which is undesirable. > + * Map the dock events to KEY_IGNORE to avoid this broken SW_DOCK reporting. > + */ > + { KE_IGNORE, 0xCA, { .sw = { SW_DOCK, 1 } } }, /* Docked */ > + { KE_IGNORE, 0xCB, { .sw = { SW_DOCK, 0 } } }, /* Undocked */ > { KE_SW, 0xCC, { .sw = { SW_TABLET_MODE, 1 } } }, /* Tablet */ > { KE_SW, 0xCD, { .sw = { SW_TABLET_MODE, 0 } } }, /* Laptop */ > { KE_END } >
