ACPI / LPSS: allow to use specific PM domain during ->probe()

PATCH In review Joseph Salisbury 4 participants 6 messages May 6, 2016 – May 9, 2016 Stable branch

lore

Share & tools

lore

Joseph Salisbury

author

2016-05-06 14:05 UTC #0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 ACPI / LPSS: allow to use specific PM domain during ->probe()

Hello,

Please consider including mainline commit de16d55206c5ce82ad44590b01718fbe2323853c in the next v4.2.y-ckt release. It was
included in the mainline tree as of v4.5-rc1. It has been tested and confirmed
to resolve http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1549354 .

commit de16d55206c5ce82ad44590b01718fbe2323853c

Author: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Date:   Fri Dec 4 23:49:19 2015 +0200

    ACPI / LPSS: allow to use specific PM domain during ->probe()

Sincerely,

Joseph Salisbury

Greg KH

2016-05-07 04:48 UTC #1 lore raw

Quoted 9 lines · Joseph Salisbury

Hello,
Please consider including mainline commit de16d55206c5ce82ad44590b01718fbe2323853c in the next v4.2.y-ckt release. It was
included in the mainline tree as of v4.5-rc1. It has been tested and confirmed
to resolve http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1549354 .

Quoted 6 lines

commit de16d55206c5ce82ad44590b01718fbe2323853c

Author: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Date:   Fri Dec 4 23:49:19 2015 +0200

    ACPI / LPSS: allow to use specific PM domain during ->probe()

Why shouldn't it also go into 4.4-stable?

thanks,

greg k-h

Greg KH

maintainer

2016-05-08 17:11 UTC #2 lore raw

In reply to Joseph Salisbury

Quoted 9 lines · Joseph Salisbury

Hello,
Please consider including mainline commit de16d55206c5ce82ad44590b01718fbe2323853c in the next v4.2.y-ckt release. It was
included in the mainline tree as of v4.5-rc1. It has been tested and confirmed
to resolve http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1549354 .

Quoted 6 lines

commit de16d55206c5ce82ad44590b01718fbe2323853c

Author: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Date:   Fri Dec 4 23:49:19 2015 +0200

    ACPI / LPSS: allow to use specific PM domain during ->probe()

It doesn't apply to 4.4-stable, why would it apply to 4.2?

confused,

greg k-h

Joseph Salisbury

author

2016-05-09 00:04 UTC #3 lore raw

Quoted 14 lines · Greg KH

Quoted 13 lines · Joseph Salisbury
Hello,
Please consider including mainline commit de16d55206c5ce82ad44590b01718fbe2323853c in the next v4.2.y-ckt release. It was
included in the mainline tree as of v4.5-rc1. It has been tested and confirmed
to resolve http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1549354 .
commit de16d55206c5ce82ad44590b01718fbe2323853c
Author: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Date:   Fri Dec 4 23:49:19 2015 +0200

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 2 lines
    ACPI / LPSS: allow to use specific PM domain during ->probe()
It doesn't apply to 4.4-stable, why would it apply to 4.2?
confused,
greg k-h

Hi Greg,

Commit de16d55 is an amendment to commit 01ac170, per the commit message. Commit 01ac170 landed in mainline as of 3.19-rc1 and commit de16d55 landed in mainline as of v4.5-rc1. However, neither commits were cc'd to stable.

This request for 4.2.y was to prevent a revert of a revert due to a bug[0]. In 4.2.y-ckt(And in mainline), commit 01ac170 was reverted by commit 05c7343(Commit b5f88dd in mainline). This introduced bug 1549354[0] in Ubuntu. This bug reports that the Elantech touchpad stopped working.

Commit 01ac170 was not reverted in v4.4.y, so it shouldn't have introduced the same bug. The commit message for b5f88dd says: "Fixes: 3df2da968744", but it was not cc'd to stable, so I'm not sure if you plan on including it in 4.4.y. If you do, commit 01ac170 will be needed to prevent the bug.

I also should have mentioned commit de16d55 will cause a build failure because it requires commit 14b6257 as a prerequisite. So if you include commit b5f88dd1d in 4.4.y, you will need commits de16d55 and 14b6257a5 to prevent the indicated bug.

Thanks,

Joe

[0] http://pad.lv/1549354

Andy Shevchenko

2016-05-09 11:20 UTC #4 lore raw

Quoted 45 lines · Joseph Salisbury

Quoted 17 lines · Greg KH
Quoted 15 lines · Joseph Salisbury
Hello,

Please consider including mainline commit de16d55206c5ce82ad44590b01718fbe2323853c in the next v4.2.y-ckt release.  It was
included in the mainline tree as of v4.5-rc1.  It has been tested and
confirmed
to resolve http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1549354 .

commit de16d55206c5ce82ad44590b01718fbe2323853c
Author: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> Date:   Fri Dec 4 23:49:19 2015 +0200
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
    ACPI / LPSS: allow to use specific PM domain during ->probe()
It doesn't apply to 4.4-stable, why would it apply to 4.2?
confused,
greg k-h
Hi Greg,
Commit de16d55 is an amendment to commit 01ac170, per the commit message. Commit 01ac170 landed in mainline as of 3.19-rc1 and commit de16d55 landed in mainline as of v4.5-rc1. However, neither commits were
cc'd to stable.
This request for 4.2.y was to prevent a revert of a revert due to a bug[0].  In 4.2.y-ckt(And in mainline), commit 01ac170 was reverted by commit 05c7343(Commit b5f88dd in mainline).  This introduced bug 1549354[0] in Ubuntu.  This bug reports that the Elantech touchpad stopped working.
Commit 01ac170 was not reverted in v4.4.y, so it shouldn't have introduced the same bug.  The commit message for b5f88dd says: "Fixes:
3df2da968744",  but it was not cc'd to stable, so I'm not sure if you plan on including it in 4.4.y.  If you do, commit 01ac170 will be needed to prevent the bug.

Quoted 5 lines

I also should have mentioned commit de16d55 will cause a build failure because it requires commit 14b6257 as a prerequisite. So if you include commit b5f88dd1d
in 4.4.y, you will need commits de16d55 and 14b6257a5 to prevent the indicated bug.

It might be not the best idea to cherry-pick only those two since culprit commit in your case is a part of a bigger fix, i.e. commit eebb3e8d8aaf ("ACPI / LPSS: override power state for LPSS DMA device"). So, it would be better to have that fix to land in the kernel if you care.

And just a side note, please use the agreed form of commit reference (for a mainline commits), i.e

commit <12+ hash> ("<title>")

Quoted 1 line

[0] http://pad.lv/1549354

Signature · 2 lines

Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Intel Finland Oy

Greg KH

maintainer

2016-05-09 11:42 UTC #5 lore raw

Quoted 52 lines · Andy Shevchenko

Quoted 45 lines · Joseph Salisbury
Quoted 17 lines · Greg KH
Quoted 15 lines · Joseph Salisbury
Hello,
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½
Please consider including mainline commit de16d55206c5ce82ad44590b01718fbe2323853c in the next v4.2.y-ckt release.ï¿½ï¿½It was
included in the mainline tree as of v4.5-rc1.ï¿½ï¿½It has been tested and
confirmed
to resolve http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1549354 . ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½
commit de16d55206c5ce82ad44590b01718fbe2323853c
Author: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> Date:ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Fri Dec 4 23:49:19 2015 +0200
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ACPI / LPSS: allow to use specific PM domain during ->probe()
It doesn't apply to 4.4-stable, why would it apply to 4.2?
confused,
greg k-h
Hi Greg,
Commit de16d55 is an amendment to commit 01ac170, per the commit message. Commit 01ac170 landed in mainline as of 3.19-rc1 and commit de16d55 landed in mainline as of v4.5-rc1. However, neither commits were
cc'd to stable.
This request for 4.2.y was to prevent a revert of a revert due to a bug[0].ï¿½ï¿½In 4.2.y-ckt(And in mainline), commit 01ac170 was reverted by commit 05c7343(Commit b5f88dd in mainline).ï¿½ï¿½This introduced bug 1549354[0] in Ubuntu.ï¿½ï¿½This bug reports that the Elantech touchpad stopped working.ï¿½ï¿½
Commit 01ac170 was not reverted in v4.4.y, so it shouldn't have introduced the same bug.ï¿½ï¿½The commit message for b5f88dd says: "Fixes:
3df2da968744",ï¿½ï¿½but it was not cc'd to stable, so I'm not sure if you plan on including it in 4.4.y.ï¿½ï¿½If you do, commit 01ac170 will be needed to prevent the bug.
Quoted 5 lines
I also should have mentioned commit de16d55 will cause a build failure because it requires commit 14b6257 as a prerequisite.ï¿½ï¿½So if you include commit b5f88dd1d
in 4.4.y, you will need commits de16d55 and 14b6257a5 to prevent the indicated bug.

Quoted 5 lines

It might be not the best idea to cherry-pick only those two since culprit commit in your case is a part of a bigger fix, i.e.ï¿½ commit eebb3e8d8aaf ("ACPI / LPSS: override power state for LPSS DMA device"). So, it would be better to have that fix to land in the kernel if you care.

This is crazy. I think I've taken that last patch, so I'm going to leave 4.4-stable alone for now unless someone tells me I've messed something up...

thanks,

greg k-h