linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] platform/x86: asus-wmi: Refactor Ally suspend/resume

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: <a3c39c1e-44ba-43ea-9009-966f62c25389@ljones.dev>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 11:39:01 +1300
From: "Luke D. Jones" <luke@...nes.dev>
To: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
 platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
 bentiss@...nel.org, jikos@...nel.org, mario.limonciello@....com,
 lkml@...heas.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] platform/x86: asus-wmi: Refactor Ally
 suspend/resume

On 25/03/25 01:10, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Mar 2025, Luke Jones wrote:
> 
>> From: "Luke D. Jones" <luke@...nes.dev>
>>
>> Adjust how the CSEE direct call hack is used.
>>
>> The results of months of testing combined with help from ASUS to
>> determine the actual cause of suspend issues has resulted in this
>> refactoring which immensely improves the reliability for devices which
>> do not have the following minimum MCU FW version:
>> - ROG Ally X: 313
>> - ROG Ally 1: 319
>>
>> For MCU FW versions that match the minimum or above the CSEE hack is
>> disabled and mcu_powersave set to on by default as there are no
>> negatives beyond a slightly slower device reinitialization due to the
>> MCU being powered off.
>>
>> As this is set only at module load time, it is still possible for
>> mcu_powersave sysfs attributes to change it at runtime if so desired.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Luke D. Jones <luke@...nes.dev>
> 
> This series update lost Mario's rev-bys (given in replies to v3). Was that
> intentional??

No it wasn't. I must have messed up with git.

@ Mario would you mind adding again? There are very few changes.