Re: [PATCH v6] ACPI: skip IRQ override on AMD Zen platforms

[Chuanhong Guo <gch981213@gmail.com>]

Hi!

On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 4:31 PM Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org> wrote:
> > This breaks pads on IdeaPad 5 Flex:
> > https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203794
> >
> >  > [    1.058135] hid-generic 0020:1022:0001.0001: hidraw0: SENSOR HUB
> > HID v0.00 Device [hid-amdsfh 1022:0001] on pcie_mp2_amd
> >  > [    2.038937] i2c_designware AMDI0010:00: controller timed out
> >  > [    2.146627] i2c_designware AMDI0010:03: controller timed out
> >  > [    6.166859] i2c_hid_acpi i2c-MSFT0001:00: failed to reset device: -61
> >  > [    8.279604] i2c_designware AMDI0010:03: controller timed out
> >  > [   12.310897] i2c_hid_acpi i2c-MSFT0001:00: failed to reset device: -61
> >  > [   14.429372] i2c_designware AMDI0010:03: controller timed out
> >  > [   18.462629] i2c_hid_acpi i2c-MSFT0001:00: failed to reset device: -61
> >  > [   20.579183] i2c_designware AMDI0010:03: controller timed out
> >  > [   24.598703] i2c_hid_acpi i2c-MSFT0001:00: failed to reset device: -61
> >  > [   25.629071] i2c_hid_acpi i2c-MSFT0001:00: can't add hid device: -61
> >  > [   25.629430] i2c_hid_acpi: probe of i2c-MSFT0001:00 failed with
> > error -61
> >
> > The diff of good and bad dmesgs:
> > -ACPI: IRQ 10 override to edge, high
> > -ACPI: IRQ 6 override to edge, high
> >
> > The diff of /proc/interrupts:
> >       6: ...  IR-IO-APIC    [-6-fasteoi-]    {+6-edge+}      AMDI0010:03
> >      10: ...  IR-IO-APIC   [-10-fasteoi-]   {+10-edge+}      AMDI0010:00
> >
> > And:
> >    i2c_designware: /devices/platform/AMDI0010:00
> >    i2c_designware: /devices/platform/AMDI0010:03

Oops...

> > So the if needs to be fine-tuned, apparently. Maybe introduce some list
> > as suggested in the commit log. Based on the below?
>
> Something like the attached. It's:
> 1) untested yet
> 2) contains more debug messaging
> 3) contains both cases for ACPI_ACTIVE_* as I don't know the original
> polarity

The patch in your attachment looks good to me. But I think
"lenovo_laptop" is a bit too generic. Maybe name it
lenovo_82ra instead?

>
> I don't know how widely this is spread -- maybe it would be worth a
> commandline parameter so that people can work around this until this is
> fixed by a DMI entry permanently?

That's a good idea :)

--
Regards,
Chuanhong Guo