Re: [linux-pm] commit 'ACPICA: Minimize the differences between linux GPE code and ACPICA code base' breaks EC GPE on my system

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>]

On Friday, June 11, 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, June 11, 2010, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 21:43 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: 
> > > On Friday, June 11, 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Friday, June 11, 2010, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > > > > Just bisected it.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I also tried linux-acpi-next/test, and no change.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The sympthoms are that EC does't sent any GPEs, and therefore battery
> > > > > insert/removal events don't show up.
> > > > > 
> > > > > It can be see by doing 'grep  . /sys/firmware/acpi/interrupts/*'
> > > > > With regression the line is shown like this:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > /sys/firmware/acpi/interrupts/gpe1C:   1	enabled
> > > > > 
> > > > > Without regression it is
> > > > > 
> > > > > /sys/firmware/acpi/interrupts/gpe1C:   22889	enabled
> > > > > 
> > > > > and steadily increasing.
> > > > > 
> > > > > After suspend/resume, regression disappears.
> > > > 
> > > > Hmm.
> > > > 
> > > > Can you please apply the following patches:
> > > > 
> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/104903/
> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/104912/
> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/104909/
> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/104911/
> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/104910/
> > > > 
> > > > on top of current -git and see if the problem is still there?
> > > 
> > > Also, regardless of whether or not this helps, please try to revert only the
> > > changes made by the "guilty" commit in drivers/acpi/acpica/evxface.c and see
> > > if that helps (this revert will conflict with the patches above, so you'll need
> > > to unapply them before).
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Rafael
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > 
> > Yes, reverting changes in 'drivers/acpi/acpica/evxface.c' do restore
> > correct behavior.
> 
> Good.  I think we'll need to revert them for .35, then.
> 
> I'll prepare a patch and send it to Len.

Can you check if the patch below fixes the issue?

Rafael

---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Subject: ACPI / ACPICA: Do not attempt to disable GPE when installing handler

Commit 0f849d2cc6863c7874889ea60a871fb71399dd3f (ACPICA: Minimize
the differences between linux GPE code and ACPICA code base)
introduced a change attempting to disable a GPE before installing
a handler for it in acpi_install_gpe_handler() which was incorrect.
First, the GPE disabled by it is never enabled again (except during
resume) which leads to battery insert/remove events not being
reported on the Maxim Levitsky's machine.  Second, the disabled
GPE is still reported as enabled by the sysfs interface that only
checks its enable register's enable_for_run mask.

Revert this change for now, because it causes more damage to happen
than the bug it was supposed to fix.

Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Reported-by: Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/acpica/evxface.c |   20 +++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/acpica/evxface.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/acpi/acpica/evxface.c
+++ linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/acpica/evxface.c
@@ -719,13 +720,6 @@ acpi_install_gpe_handler(acpi_handle gpe
 	handler->context = context;
 	handler->method_node = gpe_event_info->dispatch.method_node;
 
-	/* Disable the GPE before installing the handler */
-
-	status = acpi_ev_disable_gpe(gpe_event_info);
-	if (ACPI_FAILURE (status)) {
-		goto unlock_and_exit;
-	}
-
 	/* Install the handler */
 
 	flags = acpi_os_acquire_lock(acpi_gbl_gpe_lock);