Message-ID: <0711305d-28d8-c51b-16cb-f389f1a4610d@synaptics.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 Mar 2017 17:23:38 -0700
From:   Andrew Duggan <aduggan@...aptics.com>
To:     Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:     Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@...-t.net>,
        Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...il.com>,
        Jason Ekstrand <jason@...kstrand.net>,
        Cameron Gutman <aicommander@...il.com>,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>,
        Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, Nick Dyer <nick@...anahar.org>,
        Christopher Heiny <cheiny@...aptics.com>,
        linux-input <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Synaptics RMI4 touchpad regression in 4.11-rc1



On 03/29/2017 01:50 AM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> On Mar 28 2017 or thereabouts, Andrew Duggan wrote:
>> On 03/19/2017 10:00 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:23:36PM -0700, Andrew Duggan wrote:
>>>> On 03/17/2017 09:57 AM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:19 AM, Andrew Duggan<aduggan@...aptics.com>  wrote:
>>>>>> On 03/13/2017 10:10 PM, Cameron Gutman wrote:
>>>>>>> On 03/13/2017 06:35 PM, Andrew Duggan wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 03/13/2017 06:15 AM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
>>>>>>>>> [Resending, forgot to add Jiri in CC]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mar 13 2017 or thereabouts, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 13 2017 or thereabouts, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Lo! On 12.03.2017 02:55, Cameron Gutman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Beginning in 4.11-rc1, it looks like RMI4 is binding to my XPS 13
>>>>>>>>>>>> 9343's
>>>>>>>>>>>> Synaptics touchpad and dropping some errors into dmesg. Here are the
>>>>>>>>>>>> messages that seem RMI-related:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> rmi4_f34 rmi4-00.fn34: rmi_f34v7_probe: Unrecognized bootloader
>>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>>> rmi4_f34: probe of rmi4-00.fn34 failed with error -22
>>>>>>>>>>>> rmi4_f01 rmi4-00.fn01: found RMI device, manufacturer: Synaptics,
>>>>>>>>>>>> product: TM3038-001, fw id: 1832324
>>>>>>>>>>>> input: Synaptics TM3038-001 as
>>>>>>>>>>>> /devices/pci0000:00/INT3433:00/i2c-7/i2c-DLL0665:01/0018:06CB:76AD.0001/input/input19
>>>>>>>>>>>> hid-rmi 0018:06CB:76AD.0001: input,hidraw0: I2C HID v1.00 Mouse
>>>>>>>>>>>> [DLL0665:01 06CB:76AD] on i2c-DLL0665:01
>>>>>>>>>>> FWIW, I get this on my XPS 13 DE (9360) with 4.11-rc1:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> input: SynPS/2 Synaptics TouchPad as
>>>>>>>>>>> /devices/platform/i8042/serio1/input/input6
>>>>>>>>>>> rmi4_f34 rmi4-00.fn34: rmi_f34v7_probe: Unrecognized bootloader
>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>> rmi4_f34: probe of rmi4-00.fn34 failed with error -22
>>>>>>>>>>> rmi4_f01 rmi4-00.fn01: found RMI device, manufacturer: Synaptics,
>>>>>>>>>>> product: TM3038-003, fw id: 2375007
>>>>>>>>>>> input: Synaptics TM3038-003 as
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> /devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:15.1/i2c_designware.1/i2c-8/i2c-DLL075B:01/0018:06CB:76AF.0001/input/input20
>>>>>>>>>>> hid-rmi 0018:06CB:76AF.0001: input,hidraw0: I2C HID v1.00 Mouse
>>>>>>>>>>> [DLL075B:01 06CB:76AF] on i2c-DLL075B:01
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> […]
>>>>>>>>>>>> Compared to hid-multitouch, the RMI stack seems to have completely
>>>>>>>>>>>> broken
>>>>>>>>>>>> palm rejection and introduced some random jumpiness during fine
>>>>>>>>>>>> pointing
>>>>>>>>>>>> motions. I don't know if these issues are caused by the above errors
>>>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>>> are a separate issue.
>>>>>>>> The error about the bootloader version not being recognized just means
>>>>>>>> that updating the firmware is not supported on this touchpad. It is only the
>>>>>>>> F34 firmware update functionality which is failing to load. The palm
>>>>>>>> rejection and jumps are not related to this error.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe that code path should be changed to not make as much noise when it
>>>>>>> runs
>>>>>>> on known unsupported hardware. Something like the attached patch?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Looking at how hid-multitouch handles palms it looks like palms should
>>>>>>>> not be reported as active when calling input_mt_report_slot_state(). I'm
>>>>>>>> setting the tool type to MT_TOOL_PALM when the firmware determines that a
>>>>>>>> contact is a palm. But, that does not seem to be sufficient enough to have
>>>>>>>> the palms filtered out. After some quick testing it looks like the change
>>>>>>>> below will restore palm rejection similar to that provided by
>>>>>>>> hid-multitouch.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It looks like your email client ate the tabs, but if I apply the change
>>>>>>> myself it seems to fix the palm rejection regression for me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tested-by: Cameron Gutman<aicommander@...il.com>
>>>>>> Sorry, I was short on time and just copied the diff into the email. I'll
>>>>>> submit a proper patch soon with your tested-by included. Thanks for testing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I just pointed out this patch (well the actual submission) to Jason
>>>>> (Cc-ed). Given that there is no proper handling of MT_TOOL_PALM yet in
>>>>> userspace, I thought it was the easiest way.
>>>>> However, it seems that this doesn't enhance the jumps and just make it worse.
>>>> I was assuming that the jumps and palm rejection where two separate issues.
>>>> But, the palm rejection patch makes things worse?
>>>>
>>>>> Is there anything we can do to fix it (besides temporary disabling the
>>>>> automatic loading of hid-rmi)?
>>>> I do not have a fix for the jumps yet. My next step is to file a bug against
>>>> libinput or the kernel. I used evemu-record to capture a log with jumps, but
>>>> when I play it back with a different userspace input stack with an older
>>>> version of libinput I do not see the jumps. I see the jumps on Fedora 25
>>>> with libinput 1.6.3 vs Ubuntu 16.10 with libinput 1.4.3 with X). Or at least
>>>> the jumps are not as significant. But, its possible there is an issue with
>>>> how the events are being reported which is incorrect and confusing libinput.
>>>> The X and Y coordinates being reported by the firmware seem correct and I
>>>> haven't found a problem yet. I thought a bug would be a better place to
>>>> collect evemu-record logs and compare.
>>> fwiw, there's a fairly easy way to quickly check libinput for changes and
>>> that's by having the gtk3-headers installed at configure time and then
>>> running sudo ./tools/event-gui to visualize the movement (Esc quits)
>>>
>>> That tool uses libinput data directly to draw pointer motion etc, so it's a
>>> way to quickly bisect to where changes happen. Without anything else to go
>>> on, I'd say it's the new touchpad acceleration code from libinput 1.5 - the
>>> max accel factor has changed so depending on the speed of the jumps, you can
>>> now get stronger pointer movement.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>      Peter
>> I have been looking into this on and off and I found a couple things, but
>> nothing conclusive yet. I think Peter is right that versions of libinput 1.5
>> and later do make the jump more pronounced. But, the new acceleration code
>> my simply be amplifying the jumps. I went ahead and filed a libinput bug
>> since the jumps are more significant in newer versions of libinput and I
>> attached some evemu-record logs.
>>
>> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100436
>>
>> I also spent time looking into the kernel drivers to see if they were
>> causing or contributing to the jumps. One of the things that I tried was
>> calling rmi_irq_fn() from a workqueue instead of calling
>> generic_handle_irq(). Originally, we were using a workqueue before interrupt
>> handling was added to the rmi core. I also tried moving the call to
>> generic_handle_irq() to a workqueue. In both cases the jumps seemed to
>> disappear or at least be reduced. I looked through the irq handling code and
>> I did not see anything which should cause an issue. The only difference
>> between irq thread and the workqueue that I could think of is that the irq
>> thread runs at a higher priority. But, I didn't really see much of a
>> difference between the timing of the events in the evemu-record logs.
> Despite libinput having issues has reported by Peter, I wonder if the
> priority of the IRQ thread isn't the one interfering with the data here.
> In the workqueue version, the processing of the events didn't interfere
> with the retrieval of the I2C values. But with the IRQ thread, we might
> be delaying the retrieval of the values, and we might not be reading the
> correct value at the right time (oversimplifying it, but I think you get
> the gist of it). The 2 IRQ threads from I2C to read the data and the
> other one from RMI4 might simply be interfering.
>
> I am sure you have something equivalent in your tree, but could you
> confirm that the following patch removes the jumps?

Yes, this patch does remove the jumps. My version just restored the old 
functionality which was to call rmi_process_interrupts from a workqueue 
inside hid-rmi. Your patch seems more complete.

I did look to see if I could find something in the threaded IRQ code 
which would confirm that there was some interference going on. But, I 
didn't find anything. I also see jumps with USB devices and since USB 
devices do not use threaded IRQs that did not seem to be the source. 
Looking at the call stack in which rmi_input_event() gets called they 
seem quite different between USB and I2C.

I also tried calling generic_handle_irq() from a workqueue and that also 
seemed to remove the jumps. That led me to look into if there were any 
side affects from calling local_irq_save / restore or 
generic_handle_irq() from inside the IRQ thread or IRQ handler. But, I 
could not find anything which would indicate that doing this was unsafe.

This is what I tried:
https://github.com/aduggan/linux/commit/d484e423e7375f1a6564f735f44a1246f6c0ee84

> ---
>
>  From b60c0b4f145e171e55ffd861a852a49f5104d59f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Benjamin Tissoires<benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>
> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:41:34 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] Input: rmi4 - remove the need for artificial IRQ in case of
>   HID
>
> The IRQ from rmi4 may interfere with the one we currently use on i2c-hid.
> Given that there is already a need for an external API from rmi4 to
> forward the attention data, we can, in this particular case rely on a
> separate workqueue to prevent cursor jumps.
>
> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires<benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>

Tested-by: Andrew Duggan <aduggan@...aptics.com>

> ---
>   drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c           |  64 ---------------------
>   drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c | 122 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>   include/linux/rmi.h             |   1 +
>   3 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 112 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c b/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c
> index 5b40c26..4aa882c 100644
> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c
> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c
> @@ -316,19 +316,12 @@ static int rmi_input_event(struct hid_device *hdev, u8 *data, int size)
>   {
>   	struct rmi_data *hdata = hid_get_drvdata(hdev);
>   	struct rmi_device *rmi_dev = hdata->xport.rmi_dev;
> -	unsigned long flags;
>   
>   	if (!(test_bit(RMI_STARTED, &hdata->flags)))
>   		return 0;
>   
> -	local_irq_save(flags);
> -
>   	rmi_set_attn_data(rmi_dev, data[1], &data[2], size - 2);
>   
> -	generic_handle_irq(hdata->rmi_irq);
> -
> -	local_irq_restore(flags);
> -
>   	return 1;
>   }
>   
> @@ -556,56 +549,6 @@ static const struct rmi_transport_ops hid_rmi_ops = {
>   	.reset		= rmi_hid_reset,
>   };
>   
> -static void rmi_irq_teardown(void *data)
> -{
> -	struct rmi_data *hdata = data;
> -	struct irq_domain *domain = hdata->domain;
> -
> -	if (!domain)
> -		return;
> -
> -	irq_dispose_mapping(irq_find_mapping(domain, 0));
> -
> -	irq_domain_remove(domain);
> -	hdata->domain = NULL;
> -	hdata->rmi_irq = 0;
> -}
> -
> -static int rmi_irq_map(struct irq_domain *h, unsigned int virq,
> -		       irq_hw_number_t hw_irq_num)
> -{
> -	irq_set_chip_and_handler(virq, &dummy_irq_chip, handle_simple_irq);
> -
> -	return 0;
> -}
> -
> -static const struct irq_domain_ops rmi_irq_ops = {
> -	.map = rmi_irq_map,
> -};
> -
> -static int rmi_setup_irq_domain(struct hid_device *hdev)
> -{
> -	struct rmi_data *hdata = hid_get_drvdata(hdev);
> -	int ret;
> -
> -	hdata->domain = irq_domain_create_linear(hdev->dev.fwnode, 1,
> -						 &rmi_irq_ops, hdata);
> -	if (!hdata->domain)
> -		return -ENOMEM;
> -
> -	ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(&hdev->dev, &rmi_irq_teardown, hdata);
> -	if (ret)
> -		return ret;
> -
> -	hdata->rmi_irq = irq_create_mapping(hdata->domain, 0);
> -	if (hdata->rmi_irq <= 0) {
> -		hid_err(hdev, "Can't allocate an IRQ\n");
> -		return hdata->rmi_irq < 0 ? hdata->rmi_irq : -ENXIO;
> -	}
> -
> -	return 0;
> -}
> -
>   static int rmi_probe(struct hid_device *hdev, const struct hid_device_id *id)
>   {
>   	struct rmi_data *data = NULL;
> @@ -677,18 +620,11 @@ static int rmi_probe(struct hid_device *hdev, const struct hid_device_id *id)
>   
>   	mutex_init(&data->page_mutex);
>   
> -	ret = rmi_setup_irq_domain(hdev);
> -	if (ret) {
> -		hid_err(hdev, "failed to allocate IRQ domain\n");
> -		return ret;
> -	}
> -
>   	if (data->device_flags & RMI_DEVICE_HAS_PHYS_BUTTONS)
>   		rmi_hid_pdata.f30_data.disable = true;
>   
>   	data->xport.dev = hdev->dev.parent;
>   	data->xport.pdata = rmi_hid_pdata;
> -	data->xport.pdata.irq = data->rmi_irq;
>   	data->xport.proto_name = "hid";
>   	data->xport.ops = &hid_rmi_ops;
>   
> diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c
> index d64fc92..5e65cba 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c
> @@ -209,32 +209,46 @@ void rmi_set_attn_data(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev, unsigned long irq_status,
>   	attn_data.data = fifo_data;
>   
>   	kfifo_put(&drvdata->attn_fifo, attn_data);
> +
> +	schedule_work(&drvdata->attn_work);
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rmi_set_attn_data);
>   
> -static irqreturn_t rmi_irq_fn(int irq, void *dev_id)
> +static void attn_callback(struct work_struct *work)
>   {
> -	struct rmi_device *rmi_dev = dev_id;
> -	struct rmi_driver_data *drvdata = dev_get_drvdata(&rmi_dev->dev);
> +	struct rmi_driver_data *drvdata = container_of(work,
> +							struct rmi_driver_data,
> +							attn_work);
>   	struct rmi4_attn_data attn_data = {0};
>   	int ret, count;
>   
>   	count = kfifo_get(&drvdata->attn_fifo, &attn_data);
> -	if (count) {
> -		*(drvdata->irq_status) = attn_data.irq_status;
> -		drvdata->attn_data = attn_data;
> -	}
> +	if (!count)
> +		return;
>   
> -	ret = rmi_process_interrupt_requests(rmi_dev);
> +	*(drvdata->irq_status) = attn_data.irq_status;
> +	drvdata->attn_data = attn_data;
> +
> +	ret = rmi_process_interrupt_requests(drvdata->rmi_dev);
>   	if (ret)
> -		rmi_dbg(RMI_DEBUG_CORE, &rmi_dev->dev,
> +		rmi_dbg(RMI_DEBUG_CORE, &drvdata->rmi_dev->dev,
>   			"Failed to process interrupt request: %d\n", ret);
>   
> -	if (count)
> -		kfree(attn_data.data);
> +	kfree(attn_data.data);
>   
>   	if (!kfifo_is_empty(&drvdata->attn_fifo))
> -		return rmi_irq_fn(irq, dev_id);
> +		schedule_work(&drvdata->attn_work);
> +}
> +
> +static irqreturn_t rmi_irq_fn(int irq, void *dev_id)
> +{
> +	struct rmi_device *rmi_dev = dev_id;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = rmi_process_interrupt_requests(rmi_dev);
> +	if (ret)
> +		rmi_dbg(RMI_DEBUG_CORE, &rmi_dev->dev,
> +			"Failed to process interrupt request: %d\n", ret);
>   
>   	return IRQ_HANDLED;
>   }
> @@ -242,7 +256,6 @@ static irqreturn_t rmi_irq_fn(int irq, void *dev_id)
>   static int rmi_irq_init(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev)
>   {
>   	struct rmi_device_platform_data *pdata = rmi_get_platform_data(rmi_dev);
> -	struct rmi_driver_data *data = dev_get_drvdata(&rmi_dev->dev);
>   	int irq_flags = irq_get_trigger_type(pdata->irq);
>   	int ret;
>   
> @@ -260,8 +273,6 @@ static int rmi_irq_init(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev)
>   		return ret;
>   	}
>   
> -	data->enabled = true;
> -
>   	return 0;
>   }
>   
> @@ -910,23 +921,27 @@ void rmi_enable_irq(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev, bool clear_wake)
>   	if (data->enabled)
>   		goto out;
>   
> -	enable_irq(irq);
> -	data->enabled = true;
> -	if (clear_wake && device_may_wakeup(rmi_dev->xport->dev)) {
> -		retval = disable_irq_wake(irq);
> -		if (retval)
> -			dev_warn(&rmi_dev->dev,
> -				 "Failed to disable irq for wake: %d\n",
> -				 retval);
> -	}
> +	if (irq) {
> +		enable_irq(irq);
> +		data->enabled = true;
> +		if (clear_wake && device_may_wakeup(rmi_dev->xport->dev)) {
> +			retval = disable_irq_wake(irq);
> +			if (retval)
> +				dev_warn(&rmi_dev->dev,
> +					 "Failed to disable irq for wake: %d\n",
> +					 retval);
> +		}
>   
> -	/*
> -	 * Call rmi_process_interrupt_requests() after enabling irq,
> -	 * otherwise we may lose interrupt on edge-triggered systems.
> -	 */
> -	irq_flags = irq_get_trigger_type(pdata->irq);
> -	if (irq_flags & IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH)
> -		rmi_process_interrupt_requests(rmi_dev);
> +		/*
> +		 * Call rmi_process_interrupt_requests() after enabling irq,
> +		 * otherwise we may lose interrupt on edge-triggered systems.
> +		 */
> +		irq_flags = irq_get_trigger_type(pdata->irq);
> +		if (irq_flags & IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH)
> +			rmi_process_interrupt_requests(rmi_dev);
> +	} else {
> +		data->enabled = true;
> +	}
>   
>   out:
>   	mutex_unlock(&data->enabled_mutex);
> @@ -946,20 +961,22 @@ void rmi_disable_irq(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev, bool enable_wake)
>   		goto out;
>   
>   	data->enabled = false;
> -	disable_irq(irq);
> -	if (enable_wake && device_may_wakeup(rmi_dev->xport->dev)) {
> -		retval = enable_irq_wake(irq);
> -		if (retval)
> -			dev_warn(&rmi_dev->dev,
> -				 "Failed to enable irq for wake: %d\n",
> -				 retval);
> -	}
> -
> -	/* make sure the fifo is clean */
> -	while (!kfifo_is_empty(&data->attn_fifo)) {
> -		count = kfifo_get(&data->attn_fifo, &attn_data);
> -		if (count)
> -			kfree(attn_data.data);
> +	if (irq) {
> +		disable_irq(irq);
> +		if (enable_wake && device_may_wakeup(rmi_dev->xport->dev)) {
> +			retval = enable_irq_wake(irq);
> +			if (retval)
> +				dev_warn(&rmi_dev->dev,
> +					 "Failed to enable irq for wake: %d\n",
> +					 retval);
> +		}
> +	} else {
> +		/* make sure the fifo is clean */
> +		while (!kfifo_is_empty(&data->attn_fifo)) {
> +			count = kfifo_get(&data->attn_fifo, &attn_data);
> +			if (count)
> +				kfree(attn_data.data);
> +		}
>   	}
>   
>   out:
> @@ -998,9 +1015,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rmi_driver_resume);
>   static int rmi_driver_remove(struct device *dev)
>   {
>   	struct rmi_device *rmi_dev = to_rmi_device(dev);
> +	struct rmi_driver_data *data = dev_get_drvdata(&rmi_dev->dev);
>   
>   	rmi_disable_irq(rmi_dev, false);
>   
> +	cancel_work_sync(&data->attn_work);
> +
>   	rmi_f34_remove_sysfs(rmi_dev);
>   	rmi_free_function_list(rmi_dev);
>   
> @@ -1230,9 +1250,15 @@ static int rmi_driver_probe(struct device *dev)
>   		}
>   	}
>   
> -	retval = rmi_irq_init(rmi_dev);
> -	if (retval < 0)
> -		goto err_destroy_functions;
> +	if (pdata->irq) {
> +		retval = rmi_irq_init(rmi_dev);
> +		if (retval < 0)
> +			goto err_destroy_functions;
> +	}
> +
> +	data->enabled = true;
> +
> +	INIT_WORK(&data->attn_work, attn_callback);
>   
>   	if (data->f01_container->dev.driver)
>   		/* Driver already bound, so enable ATTN now. */
> diff --git a/include/linux/rmi.h b/include/linux/rmi.h
> index 64125443..dc90178 100644
> --- a/include/linux/rmi.h
> +++ b/include/linux/rmi.h
> @@ -364,6 +364,7 @@ struct rmi_driver_data {
>   
>   	struct rmi4_attn_data attn_data;
>   	DECLARE_KFIFO(attn_fifo, struct rmi4_attn_data, 16);
> +	struct work_struct attn_work;
>   };
>   
>   int rmi_register_transport_device(struct rmi_transport_dev *xport);
> -- 2.9.3 I only tested this on a prototype attached to a cp2112 USB to 
> I2C, so I haven't tested suspend/resume and can't check on the jumps 
> here.
>> At this point I am still not sure if the issue is that the events are being
>> reported incorrectly by the kernel or if the new touchpad acceleration code
>> in libinput is just not handling the events correctly. I would appreciate
>> any suggestions. I'm not sure how much time we have left before we need to
>> decide if we need to go back to hid-multitouch or not.
> If we can get the confirmation that removing the IRQ handling from
> hid-rmi solves the issue, it would be a matter of submitting this patch
> to upstream. I also wonder if currently non PTP touchpads are affected
> by the jumps or not. If not, I'd say it's safer to delay the HID
> catchall for v4.12, if they are, then we should probably make sure this
> patch (or any fix) gets into v4.11.

Yes, I was able to reproduce the jumps on non PTP touchpads so all 
touchpads seem to be affected by this.

Andrew

> Cheers,
> Benjamin
>
>> Thanks,
>> Andrew
>>
>>>> Hopefully, this will end up being a quick fix in the kernel and we can get
>>>> it applied to 4.11 without having to hold off on disabling hid-rmi for PTPs.
>>>>
>>>> Andrew
>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Benjamin
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just to confirm: I noticed "jumpiness during fine pointing motions" as
>>>>>>>>>>> well since switching to 4.11-rc.
>>>>>>>> One of my test systems is a XPS 13 9343 and I have not really seen any
>>>>>>>> jumpiness. But, based on the data I am seeing that if I lift my finger and
>>>>>>>> place it again in a short period of time the first event or so will be at
>>>>>>>> the location of the previous contact. Then it will switch over to the
>>>>>>>> current location. When switching over to hid-multitouch I was unable to
>>>>>>>> reproduce this behavior. This definitely could be the source of the jumps.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The jumpiness definitely happens without lifting my finger, but I'm
>>>>>>> willing
>>>>>>> to test any patch you think would improve the situation. Moving one finger
>>>>>>> slowly in a figure-8 across my touchpad shows the issue clearly for me.
>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>> small variations in speed of my finger due to the friction on the trackpad
>>>>>>> get magnified to relatively large jumpy pointer movements on screen. It
>>>>>>> seems much more noticeable in diagonal movements than completely vertical
>>>>>>> or horizontal movements.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Cameron
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f34v7.c
>>>>>>> b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f34v7.c
>>>>>>> index 56c6c39..1291d9a 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f34v7.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f34v7.c
>>>>>>> @@ -1369,9 +1369,9 @@ int rmi_f34v7_probe(struct f34_data *f34)
>>>>>>>            } else if (f34->bootloader_id[1] == 7) {
>>>>>>>                    f34->bl_version = 7;
>>>>>>>            } else {
>>>>>>> -               dev_err(&f34->fn->dev, "%s: Unrecognized bootloader
>>>>>>> version\n",
>>>>>>> -                               __func__);
>>>>>>> -               return -EINVAL;
>>>>>>> +               dev_info(&f34->fn->dev, "%s: Unsupported bootloader
>>>>>>> version: %u\n",
>>>>>>> +                               __func__, f34->bootloader_id[1]);
>>>>>>> +               return -ENODEV;
>>>>>>>            }
>>>>>>>            memset(&f34->v7.blkcount, 0x00, sizeof(f34->v7.blkcount));

Powered by blists - more mailing lists