linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.4 regression fix] Input: soc_button_array - partial revert of support for newer surface devices

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:   Sat, 5 Oct 2019 17:01:18 +0200
From:   Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@...il.com>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-input@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.4 regression fix] Input: soc_button_array - partial
 revert of support for newer surface devices

Hi, again

On 10/5/19 3:20 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Ok, on x86 the GPIO drivers really should all be builtin because
> various ACPI methods including device D0 / D3 (power-on/off) methods
> may depend on them. So normally this should never happen.
> 
> If this (-EPROBE_DEFER on surface devices) somehow still is happening
> please let me know and we will figure something out.

I have never personally experienced this, only received reports which
indicated this and that the change (as well as manually reloading
soc_button_array) fixed it. I will come back to you if I hear anything
in regards to this again.

I have now also tested your patch on the Surface Book 2. Does not cause
any issues as far as I can tell.

Tested-by: Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@...il.com>

And if that is needed/wanted

Acked-by: Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@...il.com>

Regards,

Maximilian