| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <NN3UZR.VNYA824H66Q8@ljones.dev>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2023 20:02:11 +1200
From: Luke Jones <luke@...nes.dev>
To: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
Cc: tiwai@...e.com, james.schulman@...rus.com, david.rhodes@...rus.com,
rf@...nsource.cirrus.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
sbinding@...nsource.cirrus.com, Jonathan LoBue <jlobue10@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ALSA: hda: cs35l41: Support ASUS 2023 laptops with
missing DSD
On Wed, Aug 23 2023 at 09:37:08 +02:00:00, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2023 09:28:39 +0200,
> Luke Jones wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 23 2023 at 08:24:51 +02:00:00, Takashi Iwai
>> <tiwai@...e.de> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 23 Aug 2023 03:10:08 +0200,
>> > Luke D. Jones wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Support adding the missing DSD properties required for ASUS ROG
>> >> 2023
>> >> laptops and other ASUS laptops to properly utilise the cs35l41.
>> >>
>> >> This support includes both I2C and SPI connected amps.
>> >>
>> >> The SPI connected amps may be required to use an external DSD
>> patch
>> >> to fix or add the "cs-gpios" property.
>> >>
>> >> Co-developed-by: Jonathan LoBue <jlobue10@...il.com>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Jonathan LoBue <jlobue10@...il.com>
>> >> Co-developed-by: Luke D. Jones <luke@...nes.dev>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Luke D. Jones <luke@...nes.dev>
>> >> ---
>> >> sound/pci/hda/cs35l41_hda_property.c | 26
>> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/sound/pci/hda/cs35l41_hda_property.c
>> >> b/sound/pci/hda/cs35l41_hda_property.c
>> >> index 673f23257a09..69879ab57918 100644
>> >> --- a/sound/pci/hda/cs35l41_hda_property.c
>> >> +++ b/sound/pci/hda/cs35l41_hda_property.c
>> >> @@ -43,6 +43,31 @@ static int lenovo_legion_no_acpi(struct
>> >> cs35l41_hda *cs35l41, struct device *phy
>> >> return 0;
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> +/*
>> >> + * The CSC3551 is used in almost the entire ASUS ROG laptop
>> range
>> >> in 2023, this is likely to
>> >> + * also include many non ROG labelled laptops. It is also used
>> >> with either I2C connection or
>> >> + * SPI connection. The SPI connected versions may be missing a
>> >> chip select GPIO and require
>> >> + * an DSD table patch.
>> >> + */
>> >> +static int asus_rog_2023_no_acpi(struct cs35l41_hda *cs35l41,
>> >> struct device *physdev, int id,
>> >> + const char *hid)
>> >> +{
>> >> + struct cs35l41_hw_cfg *hw_cfg = &cs35l41->hw_cfg;
>> >> +
>> >> + /* check SPI or I2C address to assign the index */
>> >> + cs35l41->index = (id == 0 || id == 0x40) ? 0 : 1;
>> >> + cs35l41->channel_index = 0;
>> >> + cs35l41->reset_gpio = gpiod_get_index(physdev, NULL, 0,
>> >> GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);
>> >> + cs35l41->speaker_id = cs35l41_get_speaker_id(physdev, 0, 0,
>> 2);
>> >> + hw_cfg->spk_pos = cs35l41->index;
>> >> + hw_cfg->gpio2.func = CS35L41_INTERRUPT;
>> >> + hw_cfg->gpio2.valid = true;
>> >> + hw_cfg->bst_type = CS35L41_EXT_BOOST_NO_VSPK_SWITCH;
>> >> + hw_cfg->valid = true;
>> >> +
>> >> + return 0;
>> >> +}
>> >> +
>> >> struct cs35l41_prop_model {
>> >> const char *hid;
>> >> const char *ssid;
>> >> @@ -53,6 +78,7 @@ struct cs35l41_prop_model {
>> >> const struct cs35l41_prop_model cs35l41_prop_model_table[] = {
>> >> { "CLSA0100", NULL, lenovo_legion_no_acpi },
>> >> { "CLSA0101", NULL, lenovo_legion_no_acpi },
>> >> + { "CSC3551", NULL, asus_rog_2023_no_acpi },
>> >
>> > I believe this breaks things badly. cs35l41_add_dsd_properties()
>> is
>> > always called no matter whether _DSD is found or not. So this
>> will
>> > override the setup of all machines with CSC3551 even if it has a
>> > proper _DSD.
>>
>> These are the entries I know of so far since they definitely had to
>> be
>> added and have a DSD patch:
>>
>> - SPI_2
>> - 0x1043, 0x1473, "ASUS GU604V"
>> - 0x1043, 0x1483, "ASUS GU603V"
>> - 0x1043, 0x1493, "ASUS GV601V"
>> - 0x1043, 0x1573, "ASUS GZ301V"
>> - 0x1043, 0x1c9f, "ASUS G614JI"
>> - SPI_4
>> - 0x1043, 0x1caf, "ASUS G634JYR/JZR"
>> - I2C_2
>> - 0x1043, 0x1d1f, "ASUS ROG Strix G17
>> - 0x1043, 0x1463, "Asus GA402X"
>> - 0x1043, 0x1433, "ASUS GX650P"
>> - ROG ALLY
>>
>> You can see the variants are V, J, X, and P. A grep through the DSL
>> dumps I have collected reveals that these machines are all indeed
>> missing DSD entries. These are a mix of I2C and SPI.
>>
>> The patch I submitted was based on Stefan's work only, and tested
>> on 3
>> SPI machines plus 2 I2C machines with no issues except the SPI
>> machines needing a chipselect DSD patch.
>>
>> It's worth stating that the DSD patches people were using all
>> followed
>> the exact same template except for the SPI number, or speaker ID.
>>
>> I'd wager it being a safe bet to assume that every one of the ASUS
>> laptops this year using the CSC3551 will be missing the required DSD
>> entries given the trend so far.
>
> Yes, I know that there are tons of such devices that need the
> workaround for missing _DSD. My point is, however, that your patch
> breaks the devices that *do have* _DSD, because the function always
> overrides.
Ah, because CSC3551 is not unique at all. I see.
>
>> > The existing entries of CLSA0100 and CLSA0101 are OK since
>> > (supposedly) those never had _DSD. The current code is a bit
>> > misleading as if it's applicable easily, though.
>> >
>> > That said, we have to apply the setup only conditionally for each
>> > specific device. One easy thing would be to move the function
>> call
>> > after _DSD check. But, I *guess* that Stefan applied the
>> function at
>> > the top so that it may cover the all cases including incorrect
>> _DSD
>> > properties.
>>
>> Given the trend of what I've seen this seems like a reasonable
>> assumption and desired.
>
> ... and it's not enough. That's another point. The parameters aren't
> always same for all devices but may vary. That is, it must have some
> check of devices and models to identify which parameters may be used.
>
>> > And, the question is how to be specific to each device. This can
>> be
>> > messy, as the sub-codec driver is probed independently from
>> Realtek
>> > codec driver, hence you can't pass any flag from Realtek to CS
>> driver
>> > at the probe time. In the end, we might need to keep another
>> table of
>> > IDs (either the same SSID or DMI) to distinguish which machine
>> needs
>> > which properties.
>>
>> Is there some other ID we can use? I see:
>> [ 13.569242] cs35l41-hda spi0-CSC3551:00-cs35l41-hda.1: Cirrus
>> Logic
>> CS35L41 (35a40), Revision: B2
>> and I'd assume that 35a40 is unique? A bit of searching on my
>> discord
>> reveals that all the machines I listed that require the same patch
>> also have this identifier (including a ProArt laptop).
>
> That's not unique to each *device* (not the chip model). Say, we want
> to distinguish ASUS GU604V and ASUS G64JYR. They may have different
> setups.
>
> I guess only DMI is suitable at the time of probing this driver.
Oh, I'm sorry I should have paid more attention the first time. I can
match against acpi_subsystem_id which would be for example 10431caf yes?
I'll begin working on a patch series for each.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists