[patch] smbus unhiding kills thermal management

[patch] smbus unhiding kills thermal management

[Pavel Machek]

Do not enable the SMBus device on Asus boards if suspend
is used. We do not reenable the device on resume, leading to all sorts
of undesirable effects, the worst being a total fan failure after
resume on Samsung P35 laptop.

Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>

---
commit f14c852a8cb7483ce0e1e0e05ef49fed2f67103b
tree ab0cbe41b344a62bc81dd5cb093e3b6062c12556
parent 392dbe84f1e484b1e48036ca266cb826fd34f8da
author <pavel@amd.ucw.cz> Fri, 12 May 2006 11:50:00 +0200
committer <pavel@amd.ucw.cz> Fri, 12 May 2006 11:50:00 +0200

 drivers/pci/quirks.c |    9 ++++++++-
 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pci/quirks.c b/drivers/pci/quirks.c
index 19e2b17..9c5509f 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/quirks.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/quirks.c
@@ -895,6 +895,7 @@ static void __init k8t_sound_hostbridge(
 }
 DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_HEADER(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA, PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_8237, k8t_sound_hostbridge);
 
+#ifndef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP
 /*
  * On ASUS P4B boards, the SMBus PCI Device within the ICH2/4 southbridge
  * is not activated. The myth is that Asus said that they do not want the
@@ -906,8 +907,12 @@ DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_HEADER(PCI_VENDOR_ID_V
  * bridge. Unfortunately, this device has no subvendor/subdevice ID. So it 
  * becomes necessary to do this tweak in two steps -- I've chosen the Host
  * bridge as trigger.
+ *
+ * Actually, leaving it unhidden and not redoing the quirk over suspend2ram
+ * will cause thermal management to break down, and causing machine to
+ * overheat.
  */
-static int __initdata asus_hides_smbus = 0;
+static int __initdata asus_hides_smbus;
 
 static void __init asus_hides_smbus_hostbridge(struct pci_dev *dev)
 {
@@ -1050,6 +1055,8 @@ static void __init asus_hides_smbus_lpc_
 }
 DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_HEADER(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL,	PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH6_1,	asus_hides_smbus_lpc_ich6 );
 
+#endif
+
 /*
  * SiS 96x south bridge: BIOS typically hides SMBus device...
  */

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Re: [patch] smbus unhiding kills thermal management

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

Hi!

Pavel Machek wrote:
> Do not enable the SMBus device on Asus boards if suspend
> is used. We do not reenable the device on resume, leading to all sorts
> of undesirable effects, the worst being a total fan failure after
> resume on Samsung P35 laptop.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>

This is probably also -stable material.

Regards,
Carl-Daniel

> ---
> commit f14c852a8cb7483ce0e1e0e05ef49fed2f67103b
> tree ab0cbe41b344a62bc81dd5cb093e3b6062c12556
> parent 392dbe84f1e484b1e48036ca266cb826fd34f8da
> author <pavel@amd.ucw.cz> Fri, 12 May 2006 11:50:00 +0200
> committer <pavel@amd.ucw.cz> Fri, 12 May 2006 11:50:00 +0200
> 
>  drivers/pci/quirks.c |    9 ++++++++-
>  1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/quirks.c b/drivers/pci/quirks.c
> index 19e2b17..9c5509f 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/quirks.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/quirks.c
> @@ -895,6 +895,7 @@ static void __init k8t_sound_hostbridge(
>  }
>  DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_HEADER(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA, PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_8237, k8t_sound_hostbridge);
>  
> +#ifndef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP
>  /*
>   * On ASUS P4B boards, the SMBus PCI Device within the ICH2/4 southbridge
>   * is not activated. The myth is that Asus said that they do not want the
> @@ -906,8 +907,12 @@ DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_HEADER(PCI_VENDOR_ID_V
>   * bridge. Unfortunately, this device has no subvendor/subdevice ID. So it 
>   * becomes necessary to do this tweak in two steps -- I've chosen the Host
>   * bridge as trigger.
> + *
> + * Actually, leaving it unhidden and not redoing the quirk over suspend2ram
> + * will cause thermal management to break down, and causing machine to
> + * overheat.
>   */
> -static int __initdata asus_hides_smbus = 0;
> +static int __initdata asus_hides_smbus;
>  
>  static void __init asus_hides_smbus_hostbridge(struct pci_dev *dev)
>  {
> @@ -1050,6 +1055,8 @@ static void __init asus_hides_smbus_lpc_
>  }
>  DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_HEADER(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL,	PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH6_1,	asus_hides_smbus_lpc_ich6 );
>  
> +#endif
> +
>  /*
>   * SiS 96x south bridge: BIOS typically hides SMBus device...
>   */
> 


-- 
http://www.hailfinger.org/

Re: [patch] smbus unhiding kills thermal management

[Pavel Machek]

On Pá 12-05-06 12:13:22, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Do not enable the SMBus device on Asus boards if suspend
> > is used. We do not reenable the device on resume, leading to all sorts
> > of undesirable effects, the worst being a total fan failure after
> > resume on Samsung P35 laptop.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
> > Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
> 
> This is probably also -stable material.

Yes, I'd like to see it go into -stable. (But IIRC stable rules were
"mainline first").
								Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Re: [patch] smbus unhiding kills thermal management

[Jan Engelhardt]

>> 
>> This is probably also -stable material.
>
>Yes, I'd like to see it go into -stable. (But IIRC stable rules were
>"mainline first").

That rule was already broken IIRC.


Jan Engelhardt
-- 

Re: [stable] Re: [patch] smbus unhiding kills thermal management

[Greg KH]

On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 12:49:24PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >> 
> >> This is probably also -stable material.
> >
> >Yes, I'd like to see it go into -stable. (But IIRC stable rules were
> >"mainline first").
> 
> That rule was already broken IIRC.

For non-security issues?  The rule is, "accepted by mainline".  So has
the maintainer accepted this yet or not?

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [patch] smbus unhiding kills thermal management

[Andrew Morton]

Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz> wrote:
>
> Do not enable the SMBus device on Asus boards if suspend
>  is used. We do not reenable the device on resume, leading to all sorts
>  of undesirable effects, the worst being a total fan failure after
>  resume on Samsung P35 laptop.
> 
>  Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
>  Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
> 
>  ---
>  commit f14c852a8cb7483ce0e1e0e05ef49fed2f67103b
>  tree ab0cbe41b344a62bc81dd5cb093e3b6062c12556
>  parent 392dbe84f1e484b1e48036ca266cb826fd34f8da
>  author <pavel@amd.ucw.cz> Fri, 12 May 2006 11:50:00 +0200
>  committer <pavel@amd.ucw.cz> Fri, 12 May 2006 11:50:00 +0200

Are these attributions correct, or did Carl-Daniel write it?

Re: [patch] smbus unhiding kills thermal management

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

Andrew Morton wrote:
> Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz> wrote:
>> Do not enable the SMBus device on Asus boards if suspend
>>  is used. We do not reenable the device on resume, leading to all sorts
>>  of undesirable effects, the worst being a total fan failure after
>>  resume on Samsung P35 laptop.
>>
>>  Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
>>  Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
>>
>>  ---
>>  commit f14c852a8cb7483ce0e1e0e05ef49fed2f67103b
>>  tree ab0cbe41b344a62bc81dd5cb093e3b6062c12556
>>  parent 392dbe84f1e484b1e48036ca266cb826fd34f8da
>>  author <pavel@amd.ucw.cz> Fri, 12 May 2006 11:50:00 +0200
>>  committer <pavel@amd.ucw.cz> Fri, 12 May 2006 11:50:00 +0200
> 
> Are these attributions correct, or did Carl-Daniel write it?

I tracked down the bug and provided the patch.
Pavel changed it to use the correct config option.


Regards,
Carl-Daniel
-- 
http://www.hailfinger.org/

Re: [patch] smbus unhiding kills thermal management

[Zwane Mwaikambo]

On Fri, 12 May 2006, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:

> Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Do not enable the SMBus device on Asus boards if suspend
> > is used. We do not reenable the device on resume, leading to all sorts
> > of undesirable effects, the worst being a total fan failure after
> > resume on Samsung P35 laptop.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
> > Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
> 
> This is probably also -stable material.

Isn't it inevitable that we're going to have to rerun quirks on resume on 
some hardware?

Re: [patch] smbus unhiding kills thermal management

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
> On Fri, 12 May 2006, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> 
>> Pavel Machek wrote:
>>> Do not enable the SMBus device on Asus boards if suspend
>>> is used. We do not reenable the device on resume, leading to all sorts
>>> of undesirable effects, the worst being a total fan failure after
>>> resume on Samsung P35 laptop.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
>> This is probably also -stable material.
> 
> Isn't it inevitable that we're going to have to rerun quirks on resume on 
> some hardware?

Yes, but until we have a proper infrastructure for that, we have to
disable the smbus unhiding as a safe fix.

If you have the time to whip up a patch to add a sane quirks-on-resume
infrastructure, I'd be grateful. See the thread
"[RFC] [PATCH] Execute PCI quirks on resume from suspend-to-RAM" for
some ugly proof-of-concept.
My main motivation was to prevent bricking my laptop. Added functionality
is desirable, but secondary.

Regards,
Carl-Daniel
-- 
http://www.hailfinger.org/

Re: [patch] smbus unhiding kills thermal management

[Nigel Cunningham]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 463 bytes --]

Hi.

On Friday 12 May 2006 19:53, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Do not enable the SMBus device on Asus boards if suspend
> is used. We do not reenable the device on resume, leading to all sorts

If this is just a symptom of another problem, how about another patch 
addressing the base issue? Obviously it wouldn't be -stable material, but 
it's usually better to address the cause instead of the symptoms (or in this 
case, 'as well as').

Regards,

Nigel

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [stable] Re: [patch] smbus unhiding kills thermal management

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > >> 
> > >> This is probably also -stable material.
> > >
> > >Yes, I'd like to see it go into -stable. (But IIRC stable rules were
> > >"mainline first").
> > 
> > That rule was already broken IIRC.
> 
> For non-security issues?  The rule is, "accepted by mainline".  So has
> the maintainer accepted this yet or not?

Andrew took it to the -mm tree. That's as close to "accepted by
maintainer" as it gets, I'd say.
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html