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

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 12:11 AM,  <Mario.Limonciello@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Greg,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Darren Hart [mailto:dvhart@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 5:34 PM
>> To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario_Limonciello@xxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx;
>> pmenzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; tomas.winkler@xxxxxxxxx;
>> jan@xxxxxxxxxx; alexander.usyskin@xxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
>> yu.c.chen@xxxxxxxxx; tomi.p.sarvela@xxxxxxxxx; daniel@xxxxxxxxx;
>> len.brown@xxxxxxxxx; linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> 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@xxxxxxxx
>> wrote:
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 12:24 PM
>> > > To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario_Limonciello@xxxxxxxx>
>> > > Cc: pmenzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx;
>> > > linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; tomas.winkler@xxxxxxxxx; jan@xxxxxxxxxx;
>> > > alexander.usyskin@xxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
>> > > yu.c.chen@xxxxxxxxx; tomi.p.sarvela@xxxxxxxxx; daniel@xxxxxxxxx;
>> > > len.brown@xxxxxxxxx; linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > 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@xxxxxxxx
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > 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.
>> > >
>> > > 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
>
> 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.

Can you please elaborate on what exactly you mean here?

ACPI events wake up the system from suspend-to-idle, because the SCI
is marked as a wakeup interrupt.  Is this not sufficient?  If it
isn't, then why?

Thanks,
Rafael