Re: Regression on Dell XPS13 (was: [char-misc for 4.10-rc4 V2] mei: bus: enable OS version only for SPT and newer)

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 11:11:45PM +0000, Mario.Limonciello@dell.com wrote:

Greg,

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: Darren Hart [mailto:dvhart@infradead.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 5:34 PM
To: Limonciello, Mario <redacted>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com;
pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de; linux@leemhuis.info; tomas.winkler@intel.com;
jan@gondor.com; alexander.usyskin@intel.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
yu.c.chen@intel.com; tomi.p.sarvela@intel.com; daniel@quora.org;
len.brown@intel.com; linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Regression on Dell XPS13 (was: [char-misc for 4.10-rc4 V2] mei:
bus: enable OS version only for SPT and newer)

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 06:38:43PM +0000, Mario.Limonciello@dell.com
wrote:

quoted

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@linuxfoundation.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 12:24 PM
To: Limonciello, Mario <redacted>
Cc: pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de; rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com;
linux@leemhuis.info; tomas.winkler@intel.com; jan@gondor.com;
alexander.usyskin@intel.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
yu.c.chen@intel.com; tomi.p.sarvela@intel.com; daniel@quora.org;
len.brown@intel.com; linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Regression on Dell XPS13 (was: [char-misc for 4.10-rc4 V2] mei:
bus: enable OS version only for SPT and newer)

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 04:57:49PM +0000, Mario.Limonciello@dell.com
wrote:

quoted

So in the <6s scenario, the intel-hid driver is responsible to
receive the ACPI event and process accordingly.  The maintainer
has a patch ready for the intel-hid portion of this work, but it's
currently being reviewed by Intel to ensure it can be legally submitted

into the kernel.

quoted

quoted

Who at Intel do I need to go kick to make this mythical legal review
happen faster so we can see the code?

Len and Rafael, what is going on here?

Len and Darren are both in the loop on the discussion around this patch.
I don't know if they'll have any (public) comments they can add on the
matter yet however.

Thanks Mario. Yes, there isn't much to say here in public other than to confirm
we are keenly aware of the problem and have been actively working on fixing
it, both for this instance, and the deeper systematic failure that resulted in this
situation. No amount of kicking will expedite the process at this point, but
should we feel the need, we'll reach out.

The approval has come through and the patch has been submitted.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/platform-driver-x86/msg10286.html

Looks like it needs some work :)

And why isn't it tagged to go to the 4.10-stable kernel if it really
does fix some systems?

Note: this is only half of the fix, the second half needs the ACPI subsystem to
not be frozen to be able to receive this event.

Where is that change?

I'm still worried about 4.10-final, is that going to be broken for these
types of systems?

thanks,

greg k-h