[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d0559a60-a4c1-19a9-39c5-18a5e2e460ca@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 00:21:21 +0900
From: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...il.com>
To: "Limonciello, Mario" <mario.limonciello@....com>
Cc: Basavaraj Natikar <basavaraj.natikar@....com>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] HID: amd_sfh: Ignore uninitialized device
On 2022/06/29 0:14, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
> On 6/28/2022 10:11, Akihiko Odaki wrote:
>> On 2022/06/28 23:42, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
>>> On 6/26/2022 03:13, Akihiko Odaki wrote:
>>>> Lenovo ThinkPad C13 Yoga has AMD Sensor Fusion Hub, but it is not used
>>>> because Chrome OS EC Sensor Hub is used instead. The system therefore
>>>> never loads the firmware for MP2 and MP2 does not work. It results in
>>>> AMD_P2C_MSG3 register to have -1 as its value.
>>>>
>>>> Without this change, the driver interprets the value as it supports all
>>>> sensor types and exposes them, which confuses a userspace program,
>>>> iio-sensor-proxy, and makes it to use the non-functioning sensors
>>>> instead of functioning sensors exposed via Chrome OS EC Sensor Hub.
>>>>
>>>> Check the version bits included in AMD_P2C_MSG3 register and ignore the
>>>> device if all of the bits are set.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Have you already confirmed this failure happens in 5.19-rc1 or later
>>> as well? I would think that b5d7f43e97dabfa04a4be5ff027ce7da119332be
>>> should have fixed it.
>>
>> Yes. I confirmed it with 78ca55889a549a9a194c6ec666836329b774ab6d.
>>
>
> Thanks for confirming.
>
>> b5d7f43e97dabfa04a4be5ff027ce7da119332be deals with the case where it
>> advertises v2 but it doesn't in my case.
>
> In your case it actually goes down the v1 ops path then right?
Yes, but I doubt even that is correct in this case. I guess the v1
protocol would have a value 1 for acs in mp2_select_ops(), but it is 15
in this case. It would be nice if you confirm that hypothesis.
Regards,
Akihiko Odaki
>
> Basavaraj - is discovery unique to v2? Or does it also exist for v1?
> If it also exists for v1 I think that's a cleaner solution.
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Akihiko Odaki
>>
>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...il.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/hid/amd-sfh-hid/amd_sfh_pcie.c | 4 ++++
>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/hid/amd-sfh-hid/amd_sfh_pcie.c
>>>> b/drivers/hid/amd-sfh-hid/amd_sfh_pcie.c
>>>> index dadc491bbf6b..4137e5da77ad 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/hid/amd-sfh-hid/amd_sfh_pcie.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/hid/amd-sfh-hid/amd_sfh_pcie.c
>>>> @@ -271,6 +271,8 @@ static void mp2_select_ops(struct amd_mp2_dev
>>>> *privdata)
>>>> case V2_STATUS:
>>>> privdata->mp2_ops = &amd_sfh_ops_v2;
>>>> break;
>>>> + case 15:
>>>> + break;
>>>> default:
>>>> privdata->mp2_ops = &amd_sfh_ops;
>>>> break;
>>>> @@ -317,6 +319,8 @@ static int amd_mp2_pci_probe(struct pci_dev
>>>> *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *i
>>>> return -ENOMEM;
>>>> mp2_select_ops(privdata);
>>>> + if (!privdata->mp2_ops)
>>>> + return -ENODEV;
>>>> rc = amd_sfh_irq_init(privdata);
>>>> if (rc) {
>>>
>>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists