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

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Greg KH [off-list ref] wrote:

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

quoted

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?

quoted

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?

Nope.

I'm going to revert commit 08b98d329165 (PM / sleep / ACPI: Use the
ACPI_FADT_LOW_POWER_S0 flag) which introduced the problem in the first
place (yes, the bisection result it misleading).  In fact, the revert
is in my linux-next branch already, but I'm sort of out in the woods
now and the actual pull request will be sent next week.

BTW, this is a usual process.  We had tried to change the default
behaviour for certain class of systems and it didn't work, so we need
to take a step back, fix the problems that were exposed and try again
later.

It has been confused quite a bit, though, which is kind of worrisome.

Thanks,
Rafael