Re: [PATCH 6.17 REGRESSION FIX] gpiolib: acpi: Make set debounce errors non fatal

[Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Sep 21, 2025 at 11:11 PM Hans de Goede <hansg@kernel.org> wrote:
> On 21-Sep-25 9:03 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 21, 2025 at 9:09 PM Mario Limonciello (AMD) (kernel.org)
> > <superm1@kernel.org> wrote:
> >> On 9/20/2025 3:12 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:

...

> >> Looks pretty much identical now to what I sent in my v3 and that Andy
> >> had requested we change to make it fatal [1].
> >>
> >> Where is this bad GPIO value coming from?  It's in the GpioInt()
> >> declaration?  If so, should the driver actually be supporting this?
> >
> > Since it's in acpi_find_gpio() it's about any GPIO resource type.
> > Sorry, it seems I missed this fact. I was under the impression that v4
> > was done only for the GpioInt() case. With this being said, the
> > GpioIo() should not be fatal (it's already proven by cases in the wild
> > that sometimes given values there are unsupported by HW), but
> > GpioInt() in my opinion needs a justification to become non-fatal.
>
> GpioInt() debounce setting not succeeding already is non fatal in
> the acpi_request_own_gpiod() case, which is used for ACPI events
> (_AEI resources) and that exact use-case is why it was made non-fatal,
> so no this is not only about GpioIo() resources. See commit
> cef0d022f553 ("gpiolib: acpi: Make set-debounce-timeout failures non
> fatal")
>
> IOW we need set debounce failures to be non-fatal for both the GpioIo
> and GpioInt cases and this fix is correct as is.

Okay, since it doesn't change the state of affairs with for
acpi_dev_gpio_irq_wake_get_by(), it's fair enough to get it as is.
Mario, do you agree with Hans' explanations?

> It is very likely too late to fix this *regression* for 6.17.0, please
> queue this up for merging ASAP so that we can get a fix added to 6.17.1


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko