[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220912172401.22301-2-mario.limonciello@amd.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2022 12:23:55 -0500
From: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
To: <rafael@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <catalin@...ebit.com>, <philipp.zabel@...il.com>,
<travisghansen@...oo.com>, <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com>,
Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/6] acpi/x86: s2idle: Move _HID handling for AMD systems into structures
Right now the information about which cases to use for what are in a
comment, but this is error prone. Instead move all information into
a dedicated structure.
Tested-by: catalin@...ebit.com
Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
---
drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c b/drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c
index f9ac12b778e6..a7757551f750 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c
@@ -363,6 +363,39 @@ static int validate_dsm(acpi_handle handle, const char *uuid, int rev, guid_t *d
return ret;
}
+struct amd_lps0_hid_device_data {
+ const unsigned int rev_id;
+ const bool check_off_by_one;
+ const bool prefer_amd_guid;
+};
+
+static const struct amd_lps0_hid_device_data amd_picasso = {
+ .rev_id = 0,
+ .check_off_by_one = true,
+ .prefer_amd_guid = false,
+};
+
+static const struct amd_lps0_hid_device_data amd_cezanne = {
+ .rev_id = 0,
+ .check_off_by_one = false,
+ .prefer_amd_guid = false,
+};
+
+static const struct amd_lps0_hid_device_data amd_rembrandt = {
+ .rev_id = 2,
+ .check_off_by_one = false,
+ .prefer_amd_guid = true,
+};
+
+static const struct acpi_device_id amd_hid_ids[] = {
+ {"AMD0004", (kernel_ulong_t)&amd_picasso, },
+ {"AMD0005", (kernel_ulong_t)&amd_picasso, },
+ {"AMDI0005", (kernel_ulong_t)&amd_picasso, },
+ {"AMDI0006", (kernel_ulong_t)&amd_cezanne, },
+ {"AMDI0007", (kernel_ulong_t)&amd_rembrandt, },
+ {}
+};
+
static int lps0_device_attach(struct acpi_device *adev,
const struct acpi_device_id *not_used)
{
@@ -370,31 +403,27 @@ static int lps0_device_attach(struct acpi_device *adev,
return 0;
if (acpi_s2idle_vendor_amd()) {
- /* AMD0004, AMD0005, AMDI0005:
- * - Should use rev_id 0x0
- * - function mask > 0x3: Should use AMD method, but has off by one bug
- * - function mask = 0x3: Should use Microsoft method
- * AMDI0006:
- * - should use rev_id 0x0
- * - function mask = 0x3: Should use Microsoft method
- * AMDI0007:
- * - Should use rev_id 0x2
- * - Should only use AMD method
- */
- const char *hid = acpi_device_hid(adev);
- rev_id = strcmp(hid, "AMDI0007") ? 0 : 2;
+ static const struct acpi_device_id *dev_id;
+ const struct amd_lps0_hid_device_data *data;
+
+ for (dev_id = &amd_hid_ids[0]; dev_id->id[0]; dev_id++)
+ if (acpi_dev_hid_uid_match(adev, dev_id->id, NULL))
+ break;
+ if (dev_id != NULL)
+ data = (const struct amd_lps0_hid_device_data *) dev_id->driver_data;
+ else
+ return 0;
+ rev_id = data->rev_id;
lps0_dsm_func_mask = validate_dsm(adev->handle,
ACPI_LPS0_DSM_UUID_AMD, rev_id, &lps0_dsm_guid);
lps0_dsm_func_mask_microsoft = validate_dsm(adev->handle,
ACPI_LPS0_DSM_UUID_MICROSOFT, 0,
&lps0_dsm_guid_microsoft);
- if (lps0_dsm_func_mask > 0x3 && (!strcmp(hid, "AMD0004") ||
- !strcmp(hid, "AMD0005") ||
- !strcmp(hid, "AMDI0005"))) {
+ if (lps0_dsm_func_mask > 0x3 && data->check_off_by_one) {
lps0_dsm_func_mask = (lps0_dsm_func_mask << 1) | 0x1;
acpi_handle_debug(adev->handle, "_DSM UUID %s: Adjusted function mask: 0x%x\n",
ACPI_LPS0_DSM_UUID_AMD, lps0_dsm_func_mask);
- } else if (lps0_dsm_func_mask_microsoft > 0 &&
+ } else if (lps0_dsm_func_mask_microsoft > 0 && data->prefer_amd_guid &&
(!strcmp(hid, "AMDI0007") ||
!strcmp(hid, "AMDI0008"))) {
lps0_dsm_func_mask_microsoft = -EINVAL;
--
2.34.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists