linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: acpi: Add a ignore wakeup quirk for Clevo NH5xAx

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]

Message-ID: <97026dc5-e92e-62fe-43ae-33533125d900@tuxedocomputers.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Feb 2023 15:47:47 +0100
From:   Werner Sembach <wse@...edocomputers.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
Cc:     mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
        brgl@...ev.pl, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
        Raul E Rangel <rrangel@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: acpi: Add a ignore wakeup quirk for Clevo NH5xAx

Am 13.02.23 um 15:37 schrieb Andy Shevchenko:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 07:20:48AM -0600, Mario Limonciello wrote:
>> On 2/13/23 06:41, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 12:30:08PM +0100, Werner Sembach wrote:
>>>> Am 10.02.23 um 18:04 schrieb Andy Shevchenko:
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 05:46:36PM +0100, Werner Sembach wrote:
>>>>>> commit 1796f808e4bb ("HID: i2c-hid: acpi: Stop setting wakeup_capable")
>>>>>> changed the policy such that I2C touchpads may be able to wake up the
>>>>>> system by default if the system is configured as such.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However on Clevo NH5xAx/TUXEDO XA15 Gen10 there is a mistake in the ACPI
>>>>>> tables that the TP_ATTN# signal connected to GPIO 10 is configured as
>>>>>> ActiveLow and level triggered but connected to a pull up.
>>>>> I'm not sure I understand the issue here. From what you say here it seems
>>>>> correct ACPI description.
>>>> TBH I copied the commit description from https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=4cb786180dfb5258ff3111181b5e4ecb1d4a297b
>>>> which is for a different device having the exact same problem.
>>> Yeah, and I reviewed that and seems paid no attention to this detail.
>>>
>>> So, ActiveLow + PullUp is the _right_ thing to do in ACPI.
>>> The problem seems somewhere else.
>>>
>>> Mario, can we have an access to the schematics of the affected pin to
>>> understand better what's going on?
>>>
>>> Or is that description missing some crucial detail?

Schematics for the NH5xAx can also be found on this unofficial clevo mirror 
(service manuals, scroll to end for schematics):

http://repo.palkeo.com/clevo-mirror/NH5xACx_AFx_ADx/NH50AC.zip

http://repo.palkeo.com/clevo-mirror/NH5xACx_AFx_ADx/NH50AF1.zip

User: repo

PW: repo

>> The schematics were shared by the reporter for the original issue which is
>> how we reached the conclusion there was a mistake.
>>
>> As they're both Clevo designs it's certainly possible they have the same
>> mistake in two systems.
> Thank you!
> I have looked at the schematics and read discussion.
>
> So, the conclusion that this is a BIOS bug is incorrect in my opinion.
> The problem is either in the PMIC/EC firmware that shouldn't shut down 3.3VS
> signal for a while or on the PCB level, so that pull up should be connected
> to another power source that stays on.
>
> This means the description on the initial patch with the same issue is
> incorrect.
>
> Do we know the power sequence on the suspend to see which and how on the
> time line the power sources are off/on?
>
>>>>>> As soon as the
>>>>>> system suspends the touchpad loses power and then the system wakes up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To avoid this problem, introduce a quirk for this model that will prevent
>>>>>> the wakeup capability for being set for GPIO 10.
>>>>> I'm not against fixing this, but wouldn't be better to actually target the root
>>>>> cause and have a different quirk? Or is it me who didn't get what is the root
>>>>> cause?
>>>>>
>>>> I missed to reference the original discussion while copying the description:
>>>> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/1722#note_1720627 (Note that
>>>> it's a somewhat convoluted issue spanning multiple bugs when you scroll up
>>>> from that particular linked comment, which are however irrelevant for this
>>>> patch)
>>>>
>>>> I'm not deep into how ACPI defined IRQ work so maybe not a good idea for me
>>>> summing it up, as I might have misunderstood parts of it ^^
>>> The GpioIo() and GpioInt() resources have gaps in them, due to this some
>>> additional information is required or some heuristics is used to deduct
>>> the settings.
>>>
>>> All this is described in
>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/firmware-guide/acpi/gpio-properties.html
>>>
>>>> I added the other ones from there to the cc.
>>> Thank you.