| Message ID | 20171005142021.4899-1-hdegoede@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded, archived |
| Delegated to: | Andy Shevchenko |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: > It seems that the WMI GUID used by the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys is not > as unique as a GUID should be and is used on some other devices too. > > This is causing spurious key-press reports on these other devices. > > This commits adds a DMI check to the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys driver to > ensure that it is actually running on a PEAQ 2-in-1, fixing the > spurious key-presses on these other devices. > Recently I have pushed similar patch (another device). Can you rebase against testing? > BugLink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1497861 > BugLink: https://bugzilla.suse.com/attachment.cgi?id=743182 > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> > --- > drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c > index bc98ef95514a..67fa3fa32011 100644 > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ > */ > > #include <linux/acpi.h> > +#include <linux/dmi.h> > #include <linux/input-polldev.h> > #include <linux/kernel.h> > #include <linux/module.h> > @@ -64,8 +65,22 @@ static void peaq_wmi_poll(struct input_polled_dev *dev) > } > } > > +/* Some other devices (Shuttle XS35) use the same WMI GUID for other purposes */ > +static const struct dmi_system_id peaq_dmi_table[] = { > + { > + .matches = { > + DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "PEAQ"), > + DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "PEAQ PMM C1010 MD99187"), > + }, > + }, > +}; > + > static int __init peaq_wmi_init(void) > { > + /* WMI GUID is not unique, also check for a DMI match */ > + if (!dmi_check_system(peaq_dmi_table)) > + return -ENODEV; > + > if (!wmi_has_guid(PEAQ_DOLBY_BUTTON_GUID)) > return -ENODEV; > > @@ -86,6 +101,9 @@ static int __init peaq_wmi_init(void) > > static void __exit peaq_wmi_exit(void) > { > + if (!dmi_check_system(peaq_dmi_table)) > + return; > + > if (!wmi_has_guid(PEAQ_DOLBY_BUTTON_GUID)) > return; > > -- > 2.14.2 >
Hi, On 05-10-17 16:23, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: >> It seems that the WMI GUID used by the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys is not >> as unique as a GUID should be and is used on some other devices too. >> >> This is causing spurious key-press reports on these other devices. >> >> This commits adds a DMI check to the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys driver to >> ensure that it is actually running on a PEAQ 2-in-1, fixing the >> spurious key-presses on these other devices. >> > > Recently I have pushed similar patch (another device). Can you rebase > against testing? That patch adds a blacklist, for yet another model then the 2 bugreports: >> BugLink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1497861 >> BugLink: https://bugzilla.suse.com/attachment.cgi?id=743182 which I've received. My patch adds a whitelist instead as it seems the GUID used is some very generic GUID, so the blacklist patch should simply be dropped, after which my patch should apply cleanly :) Regards, Hans >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> >> --- >> drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c >> index bc98ef95514a..67fa3fa32011 100644 >> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c >> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c >> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ >> */ >> >> #include <linux/acpi.h> >> +#include <linux/dmi.h> >> #include <linux/input-polldev.h> >> #include <linux/kernel.h> >> #include <linux/module.h> >> @@ -64,8 +65,22 @@ static void peaq_wmi_poll(struct input_polled_dev *dev) >> } >> } >> >> +/* Some other devices (Shuttle XS35) use the same WMI GUID for other purposes */ >> +static const struct dmi_system_id peaq_dmi_table[] = { >> + { >> + .matches = { >> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "PEAQ"), >> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "PEAQ PMM C1010 MD99187"), >> + }, >> + }, >> +}; >> + >> static int __init peaq_wmi_init(void) >> { >> + /* WMI GUID is not unique, also check for a DMI match */ >> + if (!dmi_check_system(peaq_dmi_table)) >> + return -ENODEV; >> + >> if (!wmi_has_guid(PEAQ_DOLBY_BUTTON_GUID)) >> return -ENODEV; >> >> @@ -86,6 +101,9 @@ static int __init peaq_wmi_init(void) >> >> static void __exit peaq_wmi_exit(void) >> { >> + if (!dmi_check_system(peaq_dmi_table)) >> + return; >> + >> if (!wmi_has_guid(PEAQ_DOLBY_BUTTON_GUID)) >> return; >> >> -- >> 2.14.2 >> > > >
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On 05-10-17 16:23, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> >> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: >>> >>> It seems that the WMI GUID used by the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys is not >>> as unique as a GUID should be and is used on some other devices too. >>> >>> This is causing spurious key-press reports on these other devices. >>> >>> This commits adds a DMI check to the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys driver to >>> ensure that it is actually running on a PEAQ 2-in-1, fixing the >>> spurious key-presses on these other devices. >>> >> >> Recently I have pushed similar patch (another device). Can you rebase >> against testing? > > > That patch adds a blacklist, for yet another model then the 2 bugreports: > >>> BugLink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1497861 >>> BugLink: https://bugzilla.suse.com/attachment.cgi?id=743182 > > > which I've received. My patch adds a whitelist instead as it seems the GUID > used is some very generic GUID, Since you are maintainer and moreover have a hardware to test I assume that's correct thing to do... > so the blacklist patch should simply be > dropped, ... however, the patch can't be dropped. Either me, or you in v2 need to revert it. Tell me what you prefer here. In any case, please (re)send with Cc to Kai so he or bug reportes may have a chance to test it as well.
Hi, On 05-10-17 19:59, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 05-10-17 16:23, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> It seems that the WMI GUID used by the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys is not >>>> as unique as a GUID should be and is used on some other devices too. >>>> >>>> This is causing spurious key-press reports on these other devices. >>>> >>>> This commits adds a DMI check to the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys driver to >>>> ensure that it is actually running on a PEAQ 2-in-1, fixing the >>>> spurious key-presses on these other devices. >>>> >>> >>> Recently I have pushed similar patch (another device). Can you rebase >>> against testing? >> >> >> That patch adds a blacklist, for yet another model then the 2 bugreports: >> >>>> BugLink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1497861 >>>> BugLink: https://bugzilla.suse.com/attachment.cgi?id=743182 >> >> >> which I've received. My patch adds a whitelist instead as it seems the GUID >> used is some very generic GUID, > > Since you are maintainer and moreover have a hardware to test I assume > that's correct thing to do... > >> so the blacklist patch should simply be >> dropped, > > ... however, the patch can't be dropped. > > Either me, or you in v2 need to revert it. Tell me what you prefer here. Isn't the whole purpose of having a testing branch that patches can actually be dropped. AFAIK this has not even hit -next yet, so IMHO it should just be dropped ? If it really should be reverted instead I'll leave doing a revert up to you. > In any case, please (re)send with Cc to Kai so he or bug reportes may > have a chance to test it as well. Ok, done. Regards, Hans
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: > On 05-10-17 19:59, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: >> ... however, the patch can't be dropped. >> >> Either me, or you in v2 need to revert it. Tell me what you prefer here. > Isn't the whole purpose of having a testing branch that patches can > actually be dropped. AFAIK this has not even hit -next yet, so IMHO > it should just be dropped ? It used to be until the problem had been discovered, i.e. absence of committer's Signed-off-by. So, starting from this cycle testing branch is categorized as 'published' where we can't do any non-fast-forward work anymore. > If it really should be reverted instead I'll leave doing a revert up > to you. I heard you.
diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c index bc98ef95514a..67fa3fa32011 100644 --- a/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ */ #include <linux/acpi.h> +#include <linux/dmi.h> #include <linux/input-polldev.h> #include <linux/kernel.h> #include <linux/module.h> @@ -64,8 +65,22 @@ static void peaq_wmi_poll(struct input_polled_dev *dev) } } +/* Some other devices (Shuttle XS35) use the same WMI GUID for other purposes */ +static const struct dmi_system_id peaq_dmi_table[] = { + { + .matches = { + DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "PEAQ"), + DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "PEAQ PMM C1010 MD99187"), + }, + }, +}; + static int __init peaq_wmi_init(void) { + /* WMI GUID is not unique, also check for a DMI match */ + if (!dmi_check_system(peaq_dmi_table)) + return -ENODEV; + if (!wmi_has_guid(PEAQ_DOLBY_BUTTON_GUID)) return -ENODEV; @@ -86,6 +101,9 @@ static int __init peaq_wmi_init(void) static void __exit peaq_wmi_exit(void) { + if (!dmi_check_system(peaq_dmi_table)) + return; + if (!wmi_has_guid(PEAQ_DOLBY_BUTTON_GUID)) return;
It seems that the WMI GUID used by the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys is not as unique as a GUID should be and is used on some other devices too. This is causing spurious key-press reports on these other devices. This commits adds a DMI check to the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys driver to ensure that it is actually running on a PEAQ 2-in-1, fixing the spurious key-presses on these other devices. BugLink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1497861 BugLink: https://bugzilla.suse.com/attachment.cgi?id=743182 Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> --- drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)