Message-ID: <CAMxBKG1AAaN7zuwS-ukTEYRm2hC=AcejWbWJSmucHcXS+=-Jfg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 4 Feb 2023 22:15:39 +0000
From:   Darrell Kavanagh <darrell.kavanagh@...il.com>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc:     Bastien Nocera <hadess@...ess.net>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bug#1029850: linux: Driver not loaded for ST Microelectronics
 LSM6DS3TR-C accelerometer (acpi:SMO8B30:SMO8B30:)

Yes, I understand that.

What I mean is that the matrix read from the DSDT by Jonathan's
amended driver is

 0 -1  0
 1  0  0
 0  0  1

and the (correct) matrix created with my new hwdb entry is

 0  1  0
-1  0  0
 0  0  1

which is the algebraic transposition (ie reflection in the diagonal)
of the DSDT one.

In other words, though the DST matrix is wrong, it is wrong in a
specific way - the rows should be the columns, and vv. I was just
wondering if this was a DSDT bug that might have been seen elsewhere
before.

BTW, there is another matrix in the DSTD, but I can't find the
associated HID (10EC5280) anywhere (Linux sysfs or Windows Powershell
system data extract). It's not a correct matrix, though - could it be
just a bit of redundant code in the DST?

Darrell

On Sat, 4 Feb 2023 at 21:31, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2/4/23 18:09, Darrell Kavanagh wrote:
> > I've just noticed that the working mount matrix that I added to my
> > hwdb is the matrix retrieved from the ACPI ROTM call in the amended
> > driver, transposed.
>
> An other word for the mount matrix would be a rotation matrix,
> since it defines how the physical sensor is mounted on the PCB
> in a rotated fashion compared to its standard orientation.
>
> The x, y, z axis relationship underling of course does
> not change by the rotation, so yes all mount matrices
> are a transposition of the standard:
>
> 1, 0, 0 : 0, 1, 0 : 0, 0, 1
>
> matrix, that is expected. Where that to not be the case
> then there would be a bug in the accelerometer driver itself
> where the driver itself is swapping or inverting axis.
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 at 18:23, Darrell Kavanagh
> > <darrell.kavanagh@...il.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Finally got a 6.2.0-rc6 kernel built and installed, with the following
> >> patch, and everything is working as expected.
> >>
> >> Moving on now to look at Bastien's suggestion.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Darrell
> >>
> >> diff --git a/kernel/drm_panel_orientation_quirks.c
> >> b/kernel/linux-6.2-rc6/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_panel_orientation_quirks.c
> >> index 3659f04..590bb7b 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/drm_panel_orientation_quirks.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/linux-6.2-rc6/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_panel_orientation_quirks.c
> >> @@ -304,6 +304,12 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id orientation_data[] = {
> >>                   DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_VERSION, "Lenovo ideapad
> >> D330-10IGM"),
> >>                 },
> >>                 .driver_data = (void *)&lcd1200x1920_rightside_up,
> >> +       }, {    /* Lenovo IdeaPad Duet 3 10IGL5 */
> >> +               .matches = {
> >> +                 DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "LENOVO"),
> >> +                 DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_VERSION, "IdeaPad Duet 3 10IGL5"),
> >> +               },
> >> +               .driver_data = (void *)&lcd1200x1920_rightside_up,
> >>         }, {    /* Lenovo Ideapad D330-10IGL (HD) */
> >>                 .matches = {
> >>                   DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "LENOVO"),
> >>
> >> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 at 17:55, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On 2/1/23 18:50, Darrell Kavanagh wrote:
> >>>> Thank you. I don't have anything that could be called a big machine.
> >>>> The fastest processor I have access to is a Core m3-8100Y - that's in
> >>>> a Chromebook with 4GB memory - it can run Linux in a chroot or
> >>>> officially in Google's VM. I also have an ancient gen 2 core i5-2410M
> >>>> machine which is slower than the m3 in theory, but that has 6GB of
> >>>> memory.
> >>>>
> >>>> Is the kernel build more processor or memory bound?
> >>>
> >>> It is mostly processor bound, esp. wtih something like make -j4,
> >>> make -j16 will start taking some RAM, but with make -j4 I expect you
> >>> to be fully CPU bound.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> Hans
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 at 16:12, Bastien Nocera <hadess@...ess.net> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, 2023-02-01 at 12:00 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 2/1/23 11:28, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 01:40:49 +0000
> >>>>>>> Darrell Kavanagh <darrell.kavanagh@...il.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hello, all.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I've finally reached a conclusion on this, after testing all the
> >>>>>>>> combinations of the patches (with and without reading the acpi
> >>>>>>>> mounting matrix), window managers (wayland, xorg) and the
> >>>>>>>> presence or
> >>>>>>>> not of my custom kernel parms.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> What works well is the full set of patches with the custom kernel
> >>>>>>>> parms and a new hwdb entry for the sensor:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> sensor:modalias:acpi:SMO8B30*:dmi:*:svnLENOVO*:pn82AT:*
> >>>>>>>>  ACCEL_MOUNT_MATRIX=0, 1, 0; -1, 0, 0; 0, 0, 1
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The autorotate then works correctly in wayland and xorg, but for
> >>>>>>>> xorg,
> >>>>>>>> the settings say the screen is "portrait left" when in actual
> >>>>>>>> fact it
> >>>>>>>> is in standard laptop landscape orientation. Wayland does not
> >>>>>>>> have
> >>>>>>>> this problem (I guess because wayland's view of the screen is
> >>>>>>>> straight
> >>>>>>>> from the kernel).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Without the hwdb entry, the orientation is 90 degrees out without
> >>>>>>>> using the acpi matrix and 180 degrees out when using it. I could
> >>>>>>>> have
> >>>>>>>> gone either way here with appropriate hwdb entries, but my view
> >>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>> that we *should* be using the matrix.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Added Hans de Goede as he has probably run into more of this mess
> >>>>>>> than anyone else.  Hans, any thoughts on if we are doing something
> >>>>>>> wrong on kernel side?  Or is the matrix just wrong *sigh*
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I see below that this laptop has a panel which is mounted 90 degrees
> >>>>>> rotated, that likely explains why the ACPI matrix does not work.
> >>>>>> So the best thing to do here is to just override it with a hwdb
> >>>>>> entries.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> IIRC there are already 1 or 2 other hwdb entries which actually
> >>>>>> override the ACPI provided matrix because of similar issues.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Linux userspace expects the matrix in this case to be set so that
> >>>>>> it causes e.g. gnome's auto-rotation to put the image upright
> >>>>>> even with older gnome versions / mate / xfce which don't know about
> >>>>>> the panel being mounted 90 degrees.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So e.g. "monitor-sensor" will report left-side-up or right-side-up
> >>>>>> while the device is actually in normal clamshell mode with the
> >>>>>> display up-right.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This reporting of left-side-up or right-side-up is actually "correct"
> >>>>>> looking from the native LCD panel orientation and as mentioned is
> >>>>>> done for backward compatibility. This is documented here:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/hwdb.d/60-sensor.hwdb#L54
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The way we are handling this is likely incompatible with how Windows
> >>>>>> handles this special case of 90° rotated screen + ROTM. Or the
> >>>>>> matrix in the ACPI tables could be just wrong...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I think 'ROTM' is defined by MS.
> >>>>>>> https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/sensors/sensors-acpi-entries
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Right and as such it would be good if we can still add support to
> >>>>>> it to the sensor driver in question. Because the ROTM info usually
> >>>>>> is correct and avoids the need for adding more and more hwdb entries.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Note there already is existing support in some other sensor drivers.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So we probably need to factor out some helper code for this and share
> >>>>>> that between sensor drivers.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The only thing that concerns me is the need for custom kernel
> >>>>>>>> parms.
> >>>>>>>> It would be better if there was a way to avoid this, so that the
> >>>>>>>> user
> >>>>>>>> didn't have to mess around with their grub config. Though having
> >>>>>>>> said
> >>>>>>>> that, the sensors fix as we have it doesn't make things worse -
> >>>>>>>> under
> >>>>>>>> currently released kernels the screen always starts up sideways
> >>>>>>>> unless
> >>>>>>>> custom parms are added in grub.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We actually have a quirk mechanism in the kernel for specifying
> >>>>>> the need for: video=DSI-1:panel_orientation=right_side_up  and this
> >>>>>> will also automatically fix the fbcon orientation, see:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_panel_orientation_quirks.c
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If you submit a patch for this upstream please Cc me.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And if after that change, and copy/pasting the orientation from the
> >>>>> DSDT into hwdb the sensor and screen move in the expected ways, then
> >>>>> maybe stealing the BMC150 driver's
> >>>>> bmc150_apply_bosc0200_acpi_orientation() might be a good idea.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Once exported through "mount_matrix", iio-sensor-proxy should see it
> >>>>> and read it without the need for a hwdb entry.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers
> >>>>
> >>>
> >
>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists