Re: [PATCH] HID: intel-ish-hid: ipc: Rework EHL OOB wakeup

[Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>]

On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 2:00 AM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 6:54 PM srinivas pandruvada
> <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2023-09-19 at 15:36 +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 11:57 PM srinivas pandruvada
> > > <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Kai-Heng,
> > > > On Mon, 2023-09-18 at 09:17 +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
> > > > > Hi Even,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 8:33 AM Xu, Even <even.xu@intel.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi, Kai-Heng,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I just got feedback, for testing EHL S5 wakeup feature, you
> > > > > > need
> > > > > > several steps to setup and access
> > > > > > "https://portal.devicewise.com/things/browse" to trigger wake.
> > > > > > But currently, our test account of this website are all out of
> > > > > > data.
> > > > > > So maybe you need double check with the team who required you
> > > > > > preparing the patch for the verification.
> > > > >
> > > > > The patch is to solve the GPE refcount overflow, while
> > > > > maintaining S5
> > > > > wakeup. I don't have any mean to test S5 wake.
> > > > >
> > > > The issue is not calling acpi_disable_gpe(). To reduce the scope of
> > > > change can we just add that instead of a adding new callbacks. This
> > > > way
> > > > scope is reduced.
> > >
> > > This patch does exactly the same thing by letting PCI and ACPI handle
> > > the PME and GPE.
> > > Though the change seems to be bigger, it actually reduces the duped
> > > code, while keep the S5 wakeup ability intact.
> > It may be doing the same. But with long chain of calls without
> > verification, I am not comfortable.
> > This can be another patch by itself to use the framework.
>
> I agree.
>
> Let's change one thing at a time.
>
> > But you are targeting a fix for overflow issue, which is separate from
> > the use of PCI/ACPI framework.
>
> Yes, let's fix the bug first and make things look nicer separately.

Right, please use the fix from Srinivas and I'll send a separate patch
to make things looks better.

Kai-Heng