From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C7E422B584 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2026 01:59:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771293572; cv=none; b=Kv53f+sjR9kGkb6ds4THP8BDPyNlSkov9a7bSYvWfykl/BLEo6yzjtv30HIImbqsKGfD8D1VipridNia+f21WwZEvDLQYDFDwORJSd6Q62OHlGFJ8eQc2MhflML3rdQvwRYZ+4UNkZtq4rT4eNN+iXKUdI82S8+PnZfkxDxxawc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771293572; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xdddF9gUrJmejBmPkQa5nBav5Fvl3ghlYT0sHqc/aAc=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=ORelbfSjpW9ZTI+YNiO0q9y12/Z1OoIkYwHt2IE7is9zqTYEt5JHrZx7uasFzcZdimGUn6kVniu+rWQxYYemWkRsPFy10eEYI8hzDxjs/FMuk8wm9+6KFYvwOhM3KDKGz+iLQ5ISd/Xc1rHiuXX5Vo0Bu3Gy7Oet+fErVSFM050= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=jO7371hD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="jO7371hD" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 304A5C116C6 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2026 01:59:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1771293572; bh=xdddF9gUrJmejBmPkQa5nBav5Fvl3ghlYT0sHqc/aAc=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=jO7371hDs3LYkzeK/iKA+MCjAIQQJ6DY9dJ65GFY/6REjKQLxpOflBBiJklY/2iys ewBNkNK+CtR498BXQvNyU4KtAbaRWhHIuVd/5T+TashGGhkQSrfsCHtVofJUECXFIG 5hX4x26Jf4BupJEmCsRuZpmBbLXNlp4ZvwB3riJIsuLpD20B2CUZaPIPjlMdPRzKiy 3ZsuVhtNJFtlONRWycW/jEYOTbiNaemDGpBU63uJJZjnJ19xBzD6rSUBfBxPMR5sx+ 9vEco2ilQSvY4noBNUo4L/jg30C9SQJ5r8EvjSGbaup5W1gDya+YVG1NOsT+t+6P7R KHloyQIP3aviA== Received: by aws-us-west-2-korg-bugzilla-1.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 1DB7DC3279F; Tue, 17 Feb 2026 01:59:32 +0000 (UTC) From: bugzilla-daemon@kernel.org To: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org Subject: [Bug 221065] ideapad_acpi: unexpected charge_types spam on Yoga Pro 7 14ASP9 Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2026 01:59:31 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: AssignedTo drivers_platform_x86@kernel-bugs.osdl.org X-Bugzilla-Product: Drivers X-Bugzilla-Component: Platform_x86 X-Bugzilla-Version: 2.5 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: low X-Bugzilla-Who: anhollander516@gmail.com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: drivers_platform_x86@kernel-bugs.osdl.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D221065 --- Comment #36 from Avraham Hollander (anhollander516@gmail.com) --- (In reply to Rong Zhang from comment #34) > I also found some time looking into ucsi_acpi and the AML code of the ACPI > device (in SSDT17). >=20 > Two helper methods (\_SB.PCI0.LPC0.EC0.ECRD for reading, > \_SB.PCI0.LPC0.EC0.ECWT for writing) are repeatedly called a total of 25 = (!) > times when handling a UCSI command. Their timeout for acquiring the ECMT > mutex is 1s. Therefore, it is not surprising that some of these calls will > time out. >=20 > Considering this, it seems that ucsi_acpi will cause significant pressure= on > the ECMT mutex, as each UCSI command acquires and releases it 25 times. > Instead of blacklisting ideapad-laptop, could you try to blacklist > ucsi_acpi? Doing so should reduce the pressure on the ECMT mutex a lot, so > other ACPI methods may be less likely to time out. Again, this won't > completely "fix" the issue, and a BIOS update is the only way to fix it. >=20 > Moreover, there is no way for us to determine if any call within them has > failed, so we can't trust the UCSI ACPI device anymore -- a quirk will al= so > be required to disable usci_acpi on 83DR. I don't *seem* to be getting the mutex error with it blacklisted. However, = I'm still getting the original error from ideapad_acpi. --=20 You may reply to this email to add a comment. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching the assignee of the bug.=