linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] iio: accel: bmc150: Check for a second ACPI device for BOSC0200

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 31 Jan 2018 14:25:14 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc:     Steve Presser <steve@...ssers.name>,
        Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
        Jeremy Cline <jeremy@...ine.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...23.retrosnub.co.uk>,
        Lars Kellogg-Stedman <lars@...bit.com>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: accel: bmc150: Check for a second ACPI device for BOSC0200

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 1:43 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 01/30/2018 06:38 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 7:25 PM, Steve Presser <steve@...ssers.name>
>> wrote:

>> Yep. See chapter 8.2. Isn't enough proof? Or you believe in two
>> accelerometers with off-by-one conflicting address on a cheap laptop
>> with left unused two magnetometers on the same time?

> This is not a cheap device, this has been seen on a Lenovo Yoga 11e,
> the yoga's typically have an accelerometer in both the base and the display
> and have no use for a magnetometer. Not saying that you're wrong,

Yep, Steve explained to me. Thanks!

> but my expectations are different. Anyways we need to find someone to
> test this, I asked Jeremy to write a patch for this because we had
> Yoga 11e user (Lars Kellogg-Stedman in the CC) asking question and
> Jeremy did ask that Lars to test.
>
> It looks like we will need to reach out to Lars and get some testing done
> to figure this out one way or the other.
>
> Lars if you're reading this can you please reply. If you've trouble
> building your own kernels for testing, would you be willing to install
> Fedora so that we can provide test kernels for you?

Have you chance a look at the branch I pushed yesterday?

> For reference here is the relevant DSDT blurb from the Yoga 11e:

Yes, I have googled something like this yesterday, but it doesn't
clarify what kind of devices behind this entry.

>             Device (ACC)
>             {
>                 Name (_ADR, Zero)  // _ADR: Address
>                 Name (_HID, "BOSC0200")  // _HID: Hardware ID
>                 Name (_CID, "BOSC0200")  // _CID: Compatible ID
>                 Name (_DDN, "Accelerometer")  // _DDN: DOS Device Name
>                 Name (_UID, One)  // _UID: Unique ID
>                 Method (_CRS, 0, NotSerialized)  // _CRS: Current Resource
> Settings
>                 {
>                     Name (RBUF, ResourceTemplate ()
>                     {
>                         I2cSerialBusV2 (0x0019, ControllerInitiated,
> 0x00061A80,
>                             AddressingMode7Bit, "\\_SB.PCI0.I2C3",
>                             0x00, ResourceConsumer, , Exclusive,
>                             )
>                         I2cSerialBusV2 (0x0018, ControllerInitiated,
> 0x00061A80,
>                             AddressingMode7Bit, "\\_SB.PCI0.I2C3",
>                             0x00, ResourceConsumer, , Exclusive,
>                             )
>                     })
>                     Return (RBUF) /* \_SB_.PCI0.I2C3.ACC_._CRS.RBUF */
>
>                 }

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko