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

[Mario.Limonciello]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rjwysocki@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:rjwysocki@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Rafael J. Wysocki
> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:45 AM
> To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario_Limonciello@xxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Darren Hart
> <dvhart@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>; Paul
> Menzel <pmenzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thorsten Leemhuis
> <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@xxxxxxxxx>;
> jan@xxxxxxxxxx; Alexander Usyskin <alexander.usyskin@xxxxxxxxx>; Linux
> Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Chen, Yu C
> <yu.c.chen@xxxxxxxxx>; Tomi Sarvela <tomi.p.sarvela@xxxxxxxxx>; Daniel
> Blueman <daniel@xxxxxxxxx>; Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx>; Linux PM
> <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 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?
> 

+ Alex @ Canonical

Hmm.  Alex and I were testing this and finding that the event doesn't
wake from freeze even with the patch that lets intel-hid pick it up.

We've confirmed the event does make it through when not in freeze.
Can you recommend more debugging to introduce
here to better identify what's going on?

Alex, can you comment what you've checked already?