linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] ACPI: skip IRQ1 override on 3 Ryzen 6000 laptops

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:   Tue, 5 Jul 2022 20:24:13 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Chuanhong Guo <gch981213@...il.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        "Limonciello, Mario" <mario.limonciello@....com>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tighe Donnelly <tighe.donnelly@...tonmail.com>,
        Kent Hou Man <knthmn0@...il.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] ACPI: skip IRQ1 override on 3 Ryzen 6000 laptops

On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 2:45 PM Chuanhong Guo <gch981213@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 4:12 AM Limonciello, Mario
> <mario.limonciello@....com> wrote:
> > However I do want to point out that Windows doesn't care about legacy
> > format or not.  This bug where keyboard doesn't work only popped up on
> > Linux.
> >
> > Given the number of systems with the bug is appearing to grow I wonder
> > if the right answer is actually a new heuristic that doesn't apply the
> > kernel override for polarity inversion anymore.  Maybe if the system is
> > 2022 or newer?  Or on the ACPI version?
>
> The previous attempt to limit the scope of IRQ override ends up
> breaking some other buggy devices:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-acpi/patch/20210728151958.15205-1-hui.wang@canonical.com/
>
> It's unfortunate that the original author of this IRQ override doesn't
> limit the scope to their exact devices.
>
> Hi, Rafael! What do you think? should we skip this IRQ override
> one-by-one or add a different matching logic to check the bios date
> instead?

It would be better to find something precise enough to identify the
machines in question without pulling in the others and use that for
skipping the override instead of listing them all one by one in the
blocklist.