On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 11:11:45PM +0000, mario.limoncie...@dell.com wrote: > Greg, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Darren Hart [mailto:dvh...@infradead.org] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 5:34 PM > > To: Limonciello, Mario <mario_limoncie...@dell.com> > > Cc: gre...@linuxfoundation.org; rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com; > > pmen...@molgen.mpg.de; li...@leemhuis.info; tomas.wink...@intel.com; > > j...@gondor.com; alexander.usys...@intel.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > > yu.c.c...@intel.com; tomi.p.sarv...@intel.com; dan...@quora.org; > > len.br...@intel.com; linux...@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: Re: Regression on Dell XPS13 (was: [char-misc for 4.10-rc4 V2] mei: > > bus: enable OS version only for SPT and newer) > > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 06:38:43PM +0000, mario.limoncie...@dell.com > > wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Greg KH [mailto:gre...@linuxfoundation.org] > > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 12:24 PM > > > > To: Limonciello, Mario <mario_limoncie...@dell.com> > > > > Cc: pmen...@molgen.mpg.de; rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com; > > > > li...@leemhuis.info; tomas.wink...@intel.com; j...@gondor.com; > > > > alexander.usys...@intel.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > > > > yu.c.c...@intel.com; tomi.p.sarv...@intel.com; dan...@quora.org; > > > > len.br...@intel.com; linux...@vger.kernel.org > > > > Subject: Re: Regression on Dell XPS13 (was: [char-misc for 4.10-rc4 V2] > > > > mei: > > > > bus: enable OS version only for SPT and newer) > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 04:57:49PM +0000, mario.limoncie...@dell.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > So in the <6s scenario, the intel-hid driver is responsible to > > > > > receive the ACPI event and process accordingly. The maintainer > > > > > has a patch ready for the intel-hid portion of this work, but it's > > > > > currently being reviewed by Intel to ensure it can be legally > > > > > submitted > > into the kernel. > > > > > > > > Who at Intel do I need to go kick to make this mythical legal review > > > > happen faster so we can see the code? > > > > > > > > Len and Rafael, what is going on here? > > > > > > > > > > Len and Darren are both in the loop on the discussion around this patch. > > > I don't know if they'll have any (public) comments they can add on the > > > matter yet however. > > > > Thanks Mario. Yes, there isn't much to say here in public other than to > > confirm > > we are keenly aware of the problem and have been actively working on fixing > > it, both for this instance, and the deeper systematic failure that resulted > > in this > > situation. No amount of kicking will expedite the process at this point, but > > should we feel the need, we'll reach out. > > > > The approval has come through and the patch has been submitted. > http://www.spinics.net/lists/platform-driver-x86/msg10286.html
Looks like it needs some work :) And why isn't it tagged to go to the 4.10-stable kernel if it really does fix some systems? > Note: this is only half of the fix, the second half needs the ACPI subsystem > to > not be frozen to be able to receive this event. Where is that change? I'm still worried about 4.10-final, is that going to be broken for these types of systems? thanks, greg k-h
