Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 18 May 2015 10:30:06 -0400 | From | Jarod Wilson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] pci/hotplug: work-around for missing _RMV on HP ZBook G2 |
| |
On 5/16/2015 10:41 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > [fix Rafael's email address] > > On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 09:37:50AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >> Hi Jarod, >> >> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 03:33:58PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: >>> The HP ZBook 15 and 17 Mobile Workstations, generation 2, up to and >>> including at least BIOS revision 01.07, do not have an ACPI _RMV object >>> associated with their expresscard slots, so acpi-based hotplug-capable >>> slot detection fails. If we fall back to pcie-based detection, the systems >>> work just fine, so this uses dmi matching to do that. With luck, a future >>> BIOS will remedy this (I've let someone at HP know about the problem), >>> but for now, just use this for all existing versions. >>> >>> Note: they *do* have a proper _RMV object for what I believe is their >>> thunderbolt ports. >>> >>> Tested successfully on an HP ZBook 17 G2 and HP ZBook 15 G2. >>> >>> CC: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> >>> CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl> >>> CC: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com> >>> CC: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org >>> CC: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org >>> Signed-off-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_acpi.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_acpi.c b/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_acpi.c >>> index 93cc926..db38fb5 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_acpi.c >>> +++ b/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_acpi.c >>> @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ >>> #include <linux/pci_hotplug.h> >>> #include <linux/slab.h> >>> #include <linux/module.h> >>> +#include <linux/dmi.h> >>> #include "pciehp.h" >>> >>> #define PCIEHP_DETECT_PCIE (0) >>> @@ -109,10 +110,40 @@ static struct pcie_port_service_driver __initdata dummy_driver = { >>> .probe = dummy_probe, >>> }; >>> >>> +static int __init set_slot_detection_mode_pcie(const struct dmi_system_id *d) >>> +{ >>> + info("%s lacks ACPI _RMV object for expresscard\n", d->ident); >>> + return 1; >>> +} >>> + >>> +static struct dmi_system_id __initdata missing_acpi_rmv[] = { >>> + /* ZBook 17 through at least bios v01.07 */ >>> + { >>> + .callback = set_slot_detection_mode_pcie, >>> + .ident = "HP ZBook 17 G2 Mobile Workstation", >>> + .matches = { >>> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Hewlett-Packard"), >>> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "HP ZBook 17 G2"), >>> + }, >>> + }, >>> + /* ZBook 15 through at least bios v01.07 */ >>> + { >>> + .callback = set_slot_detection_mode_pcie, >>> + .ident = "HP ZBook 15 G2 Mobile Workstation", >>> + .matches = { >>> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Hewlett-Packard"), >>> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "HP ZBook 15 G2"), >>> + }, >>> + }, >>> + { .ident = NULL } >>> +}; >>> + >>> static int __init select_detection_mode(void) >>> { >>> struct dummy_slot *slot, *tmp; >>> >>> + if (dmi_check_system(missing_acpi_rmv)) >>> + return PCIEHP_DETECT_PCIE; >> >> Oh, my goodness. I forgot how terrible this path is. Can anyone write a >> simple explanation of how we choose to use acpiphp or pciehp? Module >> parameters? A dummy driver that looks for duplicate slot numbers? Looking >> for _ADR, _EJ0, _RMV? This is just nuts. >> >> I can't really believe that we're doing this correctly. >> >> If I understand correctly, the ZBooks don't have _RMV, but we try to use >> acpiphp anyway, and acpiphp doesn't work?
They do have an _RMV entry for another device, whatever is on 0000:00:1c.0, which appears to be the thunderbolt port, but I have yet to verify that (no thunderbolt devices to play with yet). The expresscard slot is 0000:3c:02.0.
>> That sounds more like a problem >> with our acpiphp/pciehp selection "algorithm" than a BIOS bug. >> >> Jarod, can you open a report at http://bugzilla.kernel.org and attach a >> complete dmesg log, "lspci -vv" output, and an acpidump? I'm particularly >> interested in whether the BIOS granted us control over PCIe native hotplug. >> If it did, I wonder why we would even attempt to use acpiphp.
Done:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98581
-- Jarod Wilson jarod@redhat.com
| |