RE: [PATCH 1/2] ACPI: resource: do IRQ override on LENOVO IdeaPad

[Limonciello, Mario]

[Public]



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuanhong Guo <gch981213@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 23:02
> To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jiri Slaby (SUSE) <jirislaby@xxxxxxxxxx>; rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx>; Len Brown
> <lenb@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Tighe Donnelly
> <tighe.donnelly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fridrich Strba <fstrba@xxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ACPI: resource: do IRQ override on LENOVO
> IdeaPad
> 
> Hi!
> 
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 5:02 AM Limonciello, Mario
> <Mario.Limonciello@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > [...]
> > >
> > > White-list this specific model in the override_table.
> > >
> > > For this to work, the ZEN test needs to be put below the table walk.
> >
> > Unfortunately this is the second case that popped up very recently.
> > Another one is listed here:
> >
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugz
> illa.kernel.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D216552&amp;data=05%7C01%7CM
> ario.Limonciello%40amd.com%7C27a32c2395ed4d2a85e208daa68666bb%7C3
> dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C638005393451041667%7C
> Unknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJB
> TiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=iLj95fy44%
> 2BT2KCahzTD8HP2bl2dD6gXVOcVnHylPWJc%3D&amp;reserved=0
> 
> Now I'm really curious how Windows is able to handle all these vendor crap...
> 
> > I don't think we have a good solution to cover the intersection of these
> bugs.  The
> > existing heuristic to look at legacy syntax and the IOAPIC doesn't work
> properly
> > on all the Lenovo and ASUS Ryzen 6000 systems, but it does on these other
> two.
> 
> These legacy IRQ declarations are obsolete, but they aren't really wrong.
> Meanwhile the two devices popped up until now both got IRQ declarations
> which
> don't match the actual device configuration.

You're right; both of these are technically BIOS DSDT bugs if you had assumed that this
workaround wasn't in place.

> 
> > We're going to be adding more to this table either way.  I /suspect/ the
> better solution
> > is to revert 37c81d9f1d1b and add to the table all those that are broken.
> 
> I think we should have a list of only the wrong IRQ declaration and
> apply the fix
> just for them, instead of applying the fix to all devices and skip it
> for selected
> devices the fix breaks.

OK.  In that case Jiri I think your patch series makes sense.

> 
> --
> Regards,
> Chuanhong Guo