[PATCH] acpi/blacklist: enable OSI(Linux) on newer eeepc

[PATCH] acpi/blacklist: enable OSI(Linux) on newer eeepc

[Corentin Chary]

Without this patch, eeepc-laptop won't work on newer Eeepc
because the interface it uses is disabled.

Signed-off-by: Corentin Chary <corentincj@iksaif.net>
---
 drivers/acpi/blacklist.c |   21 +++++++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/blacklist.c b/drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
index e56b2a7..cd7015d 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
@@ -218,6 +218,27 @@ static struct dmi_system_id acpi_osi_dmi_table[] __initdata = {
 	 */
 
 	/*
+	 * On newer Eeepc, the interface used by eeepc-laptop (ASUS010)
+	 * is disabled without _OSI(Linux)
+	 */
+	{
+	.callback = dmi_enable_osi_linux,
+	.ident = "Asus Eeepc-1000H",
+	.matches = {
+		     DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "ASUSTeK Computer INC."),
+		     DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "1000H"),
+		},
+	},
+	{
+	.callback = dmi_enable_osi_linux,
+	.ident = "Asus Eeepc-1005HA",
+	.matches = {
+		     DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "ASUSTeK Computer INC."),
+		     DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "1005HA"),
+		},
+	},
+
+	/*
 	 * Lenovo has a mix of systems OSI(Linux) situations
 	 * and thus we can not wildcard the vendor.
 	 *
-- 
1.6.5.2

Re: [PATCH] acpi/blacklist: enable OSI(Linux) on newer eeepc

[Matthew Garrett]

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:29:08PM +0100, Corentin Chary wrote:
> Without this patch, eeepc-laptop won't work on newer Eeepc
> because the interface it uses is disabled.

It looks easy to add the WMI interface instead. Please let's not 
perpetuate this kind of thing.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org

Re: [PATCH] acpi/blacklist: enable OSI(Linux) on newer eeepc

[Corentin Chary]

On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:29:08PM +0100, Corentin Chary wrote:
>> Without this patch, eeepc-laptop won't work on newer Eeepc
>> because the interface it uses is disabled.
>
> It looks easy to add the WMI interface instead. Please let's not
> perpetuate this kind of thing.
>

I think we could add that patch to 2.6.32, then revert it in 2.6.33 (or later)
when a eeepc-wmi driver (or wmi support inside eeepc-laptop) is available.
And I don't think such a driver (patch) will be available before 2.6.32.

That means that owner of 1000h and 1005ha won't be able to use eeepc-laptop
(camera, rfkill, hotkeys) without adding acpi_osi="Linux" manually in 2.6.32.

I know this is not a long term solution.

I would be happy to add a WMI interface as soon as I can get the hardware.

-- 
Corentin Chary
http://xf.iksaif.net

Re: [PATCH] acpi/blacklist: enable OSI(Linux) on newer eeepc

[Matthew Garrett]

On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 10:22:45PM +0100, Corentin Chary wrote:

> I think we could add that patch to 2.6.32, then revert it in 2.6.33 (or later)
> when a eeepc-wmi driver (or wmi support inside eeepc-laptop) is available.
> And I don't think such a driver (patch) will be available before 2.6.32.
> 
> That means that owner of 1000h and 1005ha won't be able to use eeepc-laptop
> (camera, rfkill, hotkeys) without adding acpi_osi="Linux" manually in 2.6.32.
> 
> I know this is not a long term solution.

The reason I'm not keen is that hardware vendors seem to continue 
believing that Linux claims to be Linux - it's almost understandable for 
Asus when they're shipping 2.6.remotely_exploitable on their hardware, 
but Lenovo are still doing it for no obvious reason. I'm worried that 
even doing a single release with this defined will result in Asus 
pulling the same trick at some point in the future.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org

Re: [PATCH] acpi/blacklist: enable OSI(Linux) on newer eeepc

[Len Brown]

On Sat, 21 Nov 2009, Matthew Garrett wrote:

> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 10:22:45PM +0100, Corentin Chary wrote:
> 
> > I think we could add that patch to 2.6.32, then revert it in 2.6.33 (or later)
> > when a eeepc-wmi driver (or wmi support inside eeepc-laptop) is available.
> > And I don't think such a driver (patch) will be available before 2.6.32.
> > 
> > That means that owner of 1000h and 1005ha won't be able to use eeepc-laptop
> > (camera, rfkill, hotkeys) without adding acpi_osi="Linux" manually in 2.6.32.
> > 
> > I know this is not a long term solution.
> 
> The reason I'm not keen is that hardware vendors seem to continue 
> believing that Linux claims to be Linux - it's almost understandable for 
> Asus when they're shipping 2.6.remotely_exploitable on their hardware, 
> but Lenovo are still doing it for no obvious reason. I'm worried that 
> even doing a single release with this defined will result in Asus 
> pulling the same trick at some point in the future.

I agree with Matthew that this is distasteful -- particularly
since the models in question came out well after upstream Linux
stopped setting OSI(Linux) (2.6.32).

However, I think the fact that this DMI is specific to the 1000h and 
1005ha makes it less scary.

Matthew,
blacklist.c shows only 3 specific Lenovo models where we DMI enable 
OSI(Linux).  Is that causing Lenovo to ship additional models,
as yet un-documented, that depend on OSI(Linux)?

thanks,
-Len Brown
Intel Open Source Technology Center

Re: [PATCH] acpi/blacklist: enable OSI(Linux) on newer eeepc

[Matthew Garrett]

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:24:37AM -0500, Len Brown wrote:

> Matthew,
> blacklist.c shows only 3 specific Lenovo models where we DMI enable 
> OSI(Linux).  Is that causing Lenovo to ship additional models,
> as yet un-documented, that depend on OSI(Linux)?

Yes - as far as I can tell, everything from the current Thinkpad line.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org

Re: [PATCH] acpi/blacklist: enable OSI(Linux) on newer eeepc

[Corentin Chary]

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 10:22:45PM +0100, Corentin Chary wrote:
>>
>> > I think we could add that patch to 2.6.32, then revert it in 2.6.33 (or later)
>> > when a eeepc-wmi driver (or wmi support inside eeepc-laptop) is available.
>> > And I don't think such a driver (patch) will be available before 2.6.32.
>> >
>> > That means that owner of 1000h and 1005ha won't be able to use eeepc-laptop
>> > (camera, rfkill, hotkeys) without adding acpi_osi="Linux" manually in 2.6.32.
>> >
>> > I know this is not a long term solution.
>>
>> The reason I'm not keen is that hardware vendors seem to continue
>> believing that Linux claims to be Linux - it's almost understandable for
>> Asus when they're shipping 2.6.remotely_exploitable on their hardware,
>> but Lenovo are still doing it for no obvious reason. I'm worried that
>> even doing a single release with this defined will result in Asus
>> pulling the same trick at some point in the future.
>
> I agree with Matthew that this is distasteful -- particularly
> since the models in question came out well after upstream Linux
> stopped setting OSI(Linux) (2.6.32).
>
> However, I think the fact that this DMI is specific to the 1000h and
> 1005ha makes it less scary.

I added 1000h and 1005h because I only get reports for these,
but I think this will affect all models with Windows 7 support :/

I'm currently trying to get the hardware, but don't think I can get it before
2.6.32 release...

-- 
Corentin Chary
http://xf.iksaif.net