Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754879AbdCaI6K (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Mar 2017 04:58:10 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58314 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753959AbdCaI6C (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Mar 2017 04:58:02 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 88E966A6D0 Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 88E966A6D0 Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:57:51 +0200 From: Benjamin Tissoires To: Andrew Duggan Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , Peter Hutterer , Benjamin Tissoires , Jason Ekstrand , Cameron Gutman , Thorsten Leemhuis , Jiri Kosina , Nick Dyer , Christopher Heiny , linux-input , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Synaptics RMI4 touchpad regression in 4.11-rc1 Message-ID: <20170331085751.GF22683@mail.corp.redhat.com> References: <20170313131537.GI4378@mail.corp.redhat.com> <07543e67-efef-a764-02e6-d81d30b89a1c@synaptics.com> <03d8e6ac-1ba4-36a6-cc07-0c07e61f754f@gmail.com> <86d9e1c0-8e2b-acdd-64a1-774fc7a4d778@synaptics.com> <4685193c-1512-44ad-bfde-1455becb9db4@synaptics.com> <20170320050009.GA20783@jelly> <20170329085006.GK4009@mail.corp.redhat.com> <0711305d-28d8-c51b-16cb-f389f1a4610d@synaptics.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <0711305d-28d8-c51b-16cb-f389f1a4610d@synaptics.com> X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.28]); Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:58:01 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 25010 Lines: 558 On Mar 29 2017 or thereabouts, Andrew Duggan wrote: > > > On 03/29/2017 01:50 AM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > On Mar 28 2017 or thereabouts, Andrew Duggan wrote: > > > On 03/19/2017 10:00 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:23:36PM -0700, Andrew Duggan wrote: > > > > > On 03/17/2017 09:57 AM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:19 AM, Andrew Duggan wrote: > > > > > > > On 03/13/2017 10:10 PM, Cameron Gutman wrote: > > > > > > > > On 03/13/2017 06:35 PM, Andrew Duggan wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 03/13/2017 06:15 AM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > > > > > > > > > [Resending, forgot to add Jiri in CC] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 13 2017 or thereabouts, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 13 2017 or thereabouts, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Lo! On 12.03.2017 02:55, Cameron Gutman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Beginning in 4.11-rc1, it looks like RMI4 is binding to my XPS 13 > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9343's > > > > > > > > > > > > > Synaptics touchpad and dropping some errors into dmesg. Here are the > > > > > > > > > > > > > messages that seem RMI-related: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rmi4_f34 rmi4-00.fn34: rmi_f34v7_probe: Unrecognized bootloader > > > > > > > > > > > > > version > > > > > > > > > > > > > rmi4_f34: probe of rmi4-00.fn34 failed with error -22 > > > > > > > > > > > > > rmi4_f01 rmi4-00.fn01: found RMI device, manufacturer: Synaptics, > > > > > > > > > > > > > product: TM3038-001, fw id: 1832324 > > > > > > > > > > > > > input: Synaptics TM3038-001 as > > > > > > > > > > > > > /devices/pci0000:00/INT3433:00/i2c-7/i2c-DLL0665:01/0018:06CB:76AD.0001/input/input19 > > > > > > > > > > > > > hid-rmi 0018:06CB:76AD.0001: input,hidraw0: I2C HID v1.00 Mouse > > > > > > > > > > > > > [DLL0665:01 06CB:76AD] on i2c-DLL0665:01 > > > > > > > > > > > > FWIW, I get this on my XPS 13 DE (9360) with 4.11-rc1: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > input: SynPS/2 Synaptics TouchPad as > > > > > > > > > > > > /devices/platform/i8042/serio1/input/input6 > > > > > > > > > > > > rmi4_f34 rmi4-00.fn34: rmi_f34v7_probe: Unrecognized bootloader > > > > > > > > > > > > version > > > > > > > > > > > > rmi4_f34: probe of rmi4-00.fn34 failed with error -22 > > > > > > > > > > > > rmi4_f01 rmi4-00.fn01: found RMI device, manufacturer: Synaptics, > > > > > > > > > > > > product: TM3038-003, fw id: 2375007 > > > > > > > > > > > > input: Synaptics TM3038-003 as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:15.1/i2c_designware.1/i2c-8/i2c-DLL075B:01/0018:06CB:76AF.0001/input/input20 > > > > > > > > > > > > hid-rmi 0018:06CB:76AF.0001: input,hidraw0: I2C HID v1.00 Mouse > > > > > > > > > > > > [DLL075B:01 06CB:76AF] on i2c-DLL075B:01 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > […] > > > > > > > > > > > > > Compared to hid-multitouch, the RMI stack seems to have completely > > > > > > > > > > > > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > palm rejection and introduced some random jumpiness during fine > > > > > > > > > > > > > pointing > > > > > > > > > > > > > motions. I don't know if these issues are caused by the above errors > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > are a separate issue. > > > > > > > > > The error about the bootloader version not being recognized just means > > > > > > > > > that updating the firmware is not supported on this touchpad. It is only the > > > > > > > > > F34 firmware update functionality which is failing to load. The palm > > > > > > > > > rejection and jumps are not related to this error. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe that code path should be changed to not make as much noise when it > > > > > > > > runs > > > > > > > > on known unsupported hardware. Something like the attached patch? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking at how hid-multitouch handles palms it looks like palms should > > > > > > > > > not be reported as active when calling input_mt_report_slot_state(). I'm > > > > > > > > > setting the tool type to MT_TOOL_PALM when the firmware determines that a > > > > > > > > > contact is a palm. But, that does not seem to be sufficient enough to have > > > > > > > > > the palms filtered out. After some quick testing it looks like the change > > > > > > > > > below will restore palm rejection similar to that provided by > > > > > > > > > hid-multitouch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It looks like your email client ate the tabs, but if I apply the change > > > > > > > > myself it seems to fix the palm rejection regression for me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tested-by: Cameron Gutman > > > > > > > Sorry, I was short on time and just copied the diff into the email. I'll > > > > > > > submit a proper patch soon with your tested-by included. Thanks for testing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just pointed out this patch (well the actual submission) to Jason > > > > > > (Cc-ed). Given that there is no proper handling of MT_TOOL_PALM yet in > > > > > > userspace, I thought it was the easiest way. > > > > > > However, it seems that this doesn't enhance the jumps and just make it worse. > > > > > I was assuming that the jumps and palm rejection where two separate issues. > > > > > But, the palm rejection patch makes things worse? > > > > > > > > > > > Is there anything we can do to fix it (besides temporary disabling the > > > > > > automatic loading of hid-rmi)? > > > > > I do not have a fix for the jumps yet. My next step is to file a bug against > > > > > libinput or the kernel. I used evemu-record to capture a log with jumps, but > > > > > when I play it back with a different userspace input stack with an older > > > > > version of libinput I do not see the jumps. I see the jumps on Fedora 25 > > > > > with libinput 1.6.3 vs Ubuntu 16.10 with libinput 1.4.3 with X). Or at least > > > > > the jumps are not as significant. But, its possible there is an issue with > > > > > how the events are being reported which is incorrect and confusing libinput. > > > > > The X and Y coordinates being reported by the firmware seem correct and I > > > > > haven't found a problem yet. I thought a bug would be a better place to > > > > > collect evemu-record logs and compare. > > > > fwiw, there's a fairly easy way to quickly check libinput for changes and > > > > that's by having the gtk3-headers installed at configure time and then > > > > running sudo ./tools/event-gui to visualize the movement (Esc quits) > > > > > > > > That tool uses libinput data directly to draw pointer motion etc, so it's a > > > > way to quickly bisect to where changes happen. Without anything else to go > > > > on, I'd say it's the new touchpad acceleration code from libinput 1.5 - the > > > > max accel factor has changed so depending on the speed of the jumps, you can > > > > now get stronger pointer movement. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Peter > > > I have been looking into this on and off and I found a couple things, but > > > nothing conclusive yet. I think Peter is right that versions of libinput 1.5 > > > and later do make the jump more pronounced. But, the new acceleration code > > > my simply be amplifying the jumps. I went ahead and filed a libinput bug > > > since the jumps are more significant in newer versions of libinput and I > > > attached some evemu-record logs. > > > > > > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100436 > > > > > > I also spent time looking into the kernel drivers to see if they were > > > causing or contributing to the jumps. One of the things that I tried was > > > calling rmi_irq_fn() from a workqueue instead of calling > > > generic_handle_irq(). Originally, we were using a workqueue before interrupt > > > handling was added to the rmi core. I also tried moving the call to > > > generic_handle_irq() to a workqueue. In both cases the jumps seemed to > > > disappear or at least be reduced. I looked through the irq handling code and > > > I did not see anything which should cause an issue. The only difference > > > between irq thread and the workqueue that I could think of is that the irq > > > thread runs at a higher priority. But, I didn't really see much of a > > > difference between the timing of the events in the evemu-record logs. > > Despite libinput having issues has reported by Peter, I wonder if the > > priority of the IRQ thread isn't the one interfering with the data here. > > In the workqueue version, the processing of the events didn't interfere > > with the retrieval of the I2C values. But with the IRQ thread, we might > > be delaying the retrieval of the values, and we might not be reading the > > correct value at the right time (oversimplifying it, but I think you get > > the gist of it). The 2 IRQ threads from I2C to read the data and the > > other one from RMI4 might simply be interfering. > > > > I am sure you have something equivalent in your tree, but could you > > confirm that the following patch removes the jumps? > > Yes, this patch does remove the jumps. My version just restored the old > functionality which was to call rmi_process_interrupts from a workqueue > inside hid-rmi. Your patch seems more complete. > > I did look to see if I could find something in the threaded IRQ code which > would confirm that there was some interference going on. But, I didn't find > anything. I also see jumps with USB devices and since USB devices do not use > threaded IRQs that did not seem to be the source. Looking at the call stack > in which rmi_input_event() gets called they seem quite different between USB > and I2C. > > I also tried calling generic_handle_irq() from a workqueue and that also > seemed to remove the jumps. That led me to look into if there were any side > affects from calling local_irq_save / restore or generic_handle_irq() from > inside the IRQ thread or IRQ handler. But, I could not find anything which > would indicate that doing this was unsafe. > > This is what I tried: > https://github.com/aduggan/linux/commit/d484e423e7375f1a6564f735f44a1246f6c0ee84 Thanks. Your patch looks smaller than mine :) Jiri, Dmitry, which patch would you prefer having upstream? Andrew's patch is smaller but requires a workqueue in hid-rmi, which then reinject the IRQ in RMI4. Mine has the workqueue in RMI4 and ditches the IRQ in hid-rmi all together (so no need to call local_irq_save() anymore). > > > --- > > > > From b60c0b4f145e171e55ffd861a852a49f5104d59f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Benjamin Tissoires > > Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:41:34 +0200 > > Subject: [PATCH] Input: rmi4 - remove the need for artificial IRQ in case of > > HID > > > > The IRQ from rmi4 may interfere with the one we currently use on i2c-hid. > > Given that there is already a need for an external API from rmi4 to > > forward the attention data, we can, in this particular case rely on a > > separate workqueue to prevent cursor jumps. > > > > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires > > Tested-by: Andrew Duggan Great :) Just to be sure, does suspend/resume still works? And also, could you send to Peter a new evemu-record of the device without the jumps? (attaching it on the fdo bug should be sufficient I guess). Cheers, Benjamin > > > --- > > drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c | 64 --------------------- > > drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c | 122 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- > > include/linux/rmi.h | 1 + > > 3 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 112 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c b/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c > > index 5b40c26..4aa882c 100644 > > --- a/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c > > +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-rmi.c > > @@ -316,19 +316,12 @@ static int rmi_input_event(struct hid_device *hdev, u8 *data, int size) > > { > > struct rmi_data *hdata = hid_get_drvdata(hdev); > > struct rmi_device *rmi_dev = hdata->xport.rmi_dev; > > - unsigned long flags; > > if (!(test_bit(RMI_STARTED, &hdata->flags))) > > return 0; > > - local_irq_save(flags); > > - > > rmi_set_attn_data(rmi_dev, data[1], &data[2], size - 2); > > - generic_handle_irq(hdata->rmi_irq); > > - > > - local_irq_restore(flags); > > - > > return 1; > > } > > @@ -556,56 +549,6 @@ static const struct rmi_transport_ops hid_rmi_ops = { > > .reset = rmi_hid_reset, > > }; > > -static void rmi_irq_teardown(void *data) > > -{ > > - struct rmi_data *hdata = data; > > - struct irq_domain *domain = hdata->domain; > > - > > - if (!domain) > > - return; > > - > > - irq_dispose_mapping(irq_find_mapping(domain, 0)); > > - > > - irq_domain_remove(domain); > > - hdata->domain = NULL; > > - hdata->rmi_irq = 0; > > -} > > - > > -static int rmi_irq_map(struct irq_domain *h, unsigned int virq, > > - irq_hw_number_t hw_irq_num) > > -{ > > - irq_set_chip_and_handler(virq, &dummy_irq_chip, handle_simple_irq); > > - > > - return 0; > > -} > > - > > -static const struct irq_domain_ops rmi_irq_ops = { > > - .map = rmi_irq_map, > > -}; > > - > > -static int rmi_setup_irq_domain(struct hid_device *hdev) > > -{ > > - struct rmi_data *hdata = hid_get_drvdata(hdev); > > - int ret; > > - > > - hdata->domain = irq_domain_create_linear(hdev->dev.fwnode, 1, > > - &rmi_irq_ops, hdata); > > - if (!hdata->domain) > > - return -ENOMEM; > > - > > - ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(&hdev->dev, &rmi_irq_teardown, hdata); > > - if (ret) > > - return ret; > > - > > - hdata->rmi_irq = irq_create_mapping(hdata->domain, 0); > > - if (hdata->rmi_irq <= 0) { > > - hid_err(hdev, "Can't allocate an IRQ\n"); > > - return hdata->rmi_irq < 0 ? hdata->rmi_irq : -ENXIO; > > - } > > - > > - return 0; > > -} > > - > > static int rmi_probe(struct hid_device *hdev, const struct hid_device_id *id) > > { > > struct rmi_data *data = NULL; > > @@ -677,18 +620,11 @@ static int rmi_probe(struct hid_device *hdev, const struct hid_device_id *id) > > mutex_init(&data->page_mutex); > > - ret = rmi_setup_irq_domain(hdev); > > - if (ret) { > > - hid_err(hdev, "failed to allocate IRQ domain\n"); > > - return ret; > > - } > > - > > if (data->device_flags & RMI_DEVICE_HAS_PHYS_BUTTONS) > > rmi_hid_pdata.f30_data.disable = true; > > data->xport.dev = hdev->dev.parent; > > data->xport.pdata = rmi_hid_pdata; > > - data->xport.pdata.irq = data->rmi_irq; > > data->xport.proto_name = "hid"; > > data->xport.ops = &hid_rmi_ops; > > diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c > > index d64fc92..5e65cba 100644 > > --- a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c > > +++ b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c > > @@ -209,32 +209,46 @@ void rmi_set_attn_data(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev, unsigned long irq_status, > > attn_data.data = fifo_data; > > kfifo_put(&drvdata->attn_fifo, attn_data); > > + > > + schedule_work(&drvdata->attn_work); > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rmi_set_attn_data); > > -static irqreturn_t rmi_irq_fn(int irq, void *dev_id) > > +static void attn_callback(struct work_struct *work) > > { > > - struct rmi_device *rmi_dev = dev_id; > > - struct rmi_driver_data *drvdata = dev_get_drvdata(&rmi_dev->dev); > > + struct rmi_driver_data *drvdata = container_of(work, > > + struct rmi_driver_data, > > + attn_work); > > struct rmi4_attn_data attn_data = {0}; > > int ret, count; > > count = kfifo_get(&drvdata->attn_fifo, &attn_data); > > - if (count) { > > - *(drvdata->irq_status) = attn_data.irq_status; > > - drvdata->attn_data = attn_data; > > - } > > + if (!count) > > + return; > > - ret = rmi_process_interrupt_requests(rmi_dev); > > + *(drvdata->irq_status) = attn_data.irq_status; > > + drvdata->attn_data = attn_data; > > + > > + ret = rmi_process_interrupt_requests(drvdata->rmi_dev); > > if (ret) > > - rmi_dbg(RMI_DEBUG_CORE, &rmi_dev->dev, > > + rmi_dbg(RMI_DEBUG_CORE, &drvdata->rmi_dev->dev, > > "Failed to process interrupt request: %d\n", ret); > > - if (count) > > - kfree(attn_data.data); > > + kfree(attn_data.data); > > if (!kfifo_is_empty(&drvdata->attn_fifo)) > > - return rmi_irq_fn(irq, dev_id); > > + schedule_work(&drvdata->attn_work); > > +} > > + > > +static irqreturn_t rmi_irq_fn(int irq, void *dev_id) > > +{ > > + struct rmi_device *rmi_dev = dev_id; > > + int ret; > > + > > + ret = rmi_process_interrupt_requests(rmi_dev); > > + if (ret) > > + rmi_dbg(RMI_DEBUG_CORE, &rmi_dev->dev, > > + "Failed to process interrupt request: %d\n", ret); > > return IRQ_HANDLED; > > } > > @@ -242,7 +256,6 @@ static irqreturn_t rmi_irq_fn(int irq, void *dev_id) > > static int rmi_irq_init(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev) > > { > > struct rmi_device_platform_data *pdata = rmi_get_platform_data(rmi_dev); > > - struct rmi_driver_data *data = dev_get_drvdata(&rmi_dev->dev); > > int irq_flags = irq_get_trigger_type(pdata->irq); > > int ret; > > @@ -260,8 +273,6 @@ static int rmi_irq_init(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev) > > return ret; > > } > > - data->enabled = true; > > - > > return 0; > > } > > @@ -910,23 +921,27 @@ void rmi_enable_irq(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev, bool clear_wake) > > if (data->enabled) > > goto out; > > - enable_irq(irq); > > - data->enabled = true; > > - if (clear_wake && device_may_wakeup(rmi_dev->xport->dev)) { > > - retval = disable_irq_wake(irq); > > - if (retval) > > - dev_warn(&rmi_dev->dev, > > - "Failed to disable irq for wake: %d\n", > > - retval); > > - } > > + if (irq) { > > + enable_irq(irq); > > + data->enabled = true; > > + if (clear_wake && device_may_wakeup(rmi_dev->xport->dev)) { > > + retval = disable_irq_wake(irq); > > + if (retval) > > + dev_warn(&rmi_dev->dev, > > + "Failed to disable irq for wake: %d\n", > > + retval); > > + } > > - /* > > - * Call rmi_process_interrupt_requests() after enabling irq, > > - * otherwise we may lose interrupt on edge-triggered systems. > > - */ > > - irq_flags = irq_get_trigger_type(pdata->irq); > > - if (irq_flags & IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH) > > - rmi_process_interrupt_requests(rmi_dev); > > + /* > > + * Call rmi_process_interrupt_requests() after enabling irq, > > + * otherwise we may lose interrupt on edge-triggered systems. > > + */ > > + irq_flags = irq_get_trigger_type(pdata->irq); > > + if (irq_flags & IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH) > > + rmi_process_interrupt_requests(rmi_dev); > > + } else { > > + data->enabled = true; > > + } > > out: > > mutex_unlock(&data->enabled_mutex); > > @@ -946,20 +961,22 @@ void rmi_disable_irq(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev, bool enable_wake) > > goto out; > > data->enabled = false; > > - disable_irq(irq); > > - if (enable_wake && device_may_wakeup(rmi_dev->xport->dev)) { > > - retval = enable_irq_wake(irq); > > - if (retval) > > - dev_warn(&rmi_dev->dev, > > - "Failed to enable irq for wake: %d\n", > > - retval); > > - } > > - > > - /* make sure the fifo is clean */ > > - while (!kfifo_is_empty(&data->attn_fifo)) { > > - count = kfifo_get(&data->attn_fifo, &attn_data); > > - if (count) > > - kfree(attn_data.data); > > + if (irq) { > > + disable_irq(irq); > > + if (enable_wake && device_may_wakeup(rmi_dev->xport->dev)) { > > + retval = enable_irq_wake(irq); > > + if (retval) > > + dev_warn(&rmi_dev->dev, > > + "Failed to enable irq for wake: %d\n", > > + retval); > > + } > > + } else { > > + /* make sure the fifo is clean */ > > + while (!kfifo_is_empty(&data->attn_fifo)) { > > + count = kfifo_get(&data->attn_fifo, &attn_data); > > + if (count) > > + kfree(attn_data.data); > > + } > > } > > out: > > @@ -998,9 +1015,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rmi_driver_resume); > > static int rmi_driver_remove(struct device *dev) > > { > > struct rmi_device *rmi_dev = to_rmi_device(dev); > > + struct rmi_driver_data *data = dev_get_drvdata(&rmi_dev->dev); > > rmi_disable_irq(rmi_dev, false); > > + cancel_work_sync(&data->attn_work); > > + > > rmi_f34_remove_sysfs(rmi_dev); > > rmi_free_function_list(rmi_dev); > > @@ -1230,9 +1250,15 @@ static int rmi_driver_probe(struct device *dev) > > } > > } > > - retval = rmi_irq_init(rmi_dev); > > - if (retval < 0) > > - goto err_destroy_functions; > > + if (pdata->irq) { > > + retval = rmi_irq_init(rmi_dev); > > + if (retval < 0) > > + goto err_destroy_functions; > > + } > > + > > + data->enabled = true; > > + > > + INIT_WORK(&data->attn_work, attn_callback); > > if (data->f01_container->dev.driver) > > /* Driver already bound, so enable ATTN now. */ > > diff --git a/include/linux/rmi.h b/include/linux/rmi.h > > index 64125443..dc90178 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/rmi.h > > +++ b/include/linux/rmi.h > > @@ -364,6 +364,7 @@ struct rmi_driver_data { > > struct rmi4_attn_data attn_data; > > DECLARE_KFIFO(attn_fifo, struct rmi4_attn_data, 16); > > + struct work_struct attn_work; > > }; > > int rmi_register_transport_device(struct rmi_transport_dev *xport); > > -- 2.9.3 I only tested this on a prototype attached to a cp2112 USB to > > I2C, so I haven't tested suspend/resume and can't check on the jumps > > here. > > > At this point I am still not sure if the issue is that the events are being > > > reported incorrectly by the kernel or if the new touchpad acceleration code > > > in libinput is just not handling the events correctly. I would appreciate > > > any suggestions. I'm not sure how much time we have left before we need to > > > decide if we need to go back to hid-multitouch or not. > > If we can get the confirmation that removing the IRQ handling from > > hid-rmi solves the issue, it would be a matter of submitting this patch > > to upstream. I also wonder if currently non PTP touchpads are affected > > by the jumps or not. If not, I'd say it's safer to delay the HID > > catchall for v4.12, if they are, then we should probably make sure this > > patch (or any fix) gets into v4.11. > > Yes, I was able to reproduce the jumps on non PTP touchpads so all touchpads > seem to be affected by this. > > Andrew > > > Cheers, > > Benjamin > > > > > Thanks, > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > Hopefully, this will end up being a quick fix in the kernel and we can get > > > > > it applied to 4.11 without having to hold off on disabling hid-rmi for PTPs. > > > > > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Benjamin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just to confirm: I noticed "jumpiness during fine pointing motions" as > > > > > > > > > > > > well since switching to 4.11-rc. > > > > > > > > > One of my test systems is a XPS 13 9343 and I have not really seen any > > > > > > > > > jumpiness. But, based on the data I am seeing that if I lift my finger and > > > > > > > > > place it again in a short period of time the first event or so will be at > > > > > > > > > the location of the previous contact. Then it will switch over to the > > > > > > > > > current location. When switching over to hid-multitouch I was unable to > > > > > > > > > reproduce this behavior. This definitely could be the source of the jumps. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The jumpiness definitely happens without lifting my finger, but I'm > > > > > > > > willing > > > > > > > > to test any patch you think would improve the situation. Moving one finger > > > > > > > > slowly in a figure-8 across my touchpad shows the issue clearly for me. > > > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > small variations in speed of my finger due to the friction on the trackpad > > > > > > > > get magnified to relatively large jumpy pointer movements on screen. It > > > > > > > > seems much more noticeable in diagonal movements than completely vertical > > > > > > > > or horizontal movements. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Cameron > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f34v7.c > > > > > > > > b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f34v7.c > > > > > > > > index 56c6c39..1291d9a 100644 > > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f34v7.c > > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f34v7.c > > > > > > > > @@ -1369,9 +1369,9 @@ int rmi_f34v7_probe(struct f34_data *f34) > > > > > > > > } else if (f34->bootloader_id[1] == 7) { > > > > > > > > f34->bl_version = 7; > > > > > > > > } else { > > > > > > > > - dev_err(&f34->fn->dev, "%s: Unrecognized bootloader > > > > > > > > version\n", > > > > > > > > - __func__); > > > > > > > > - return -EINVAL; > > > > > > > > + dev_info(&f34->fn->dev, "%s: Unsupported bootloader > > > > > > > > version: %u\n", > > > > > > > > + __func__, f34->bootloader_id[1]); > > > > > > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > memset(&f34->v7.blkcount, 0x00, sizeof(f34->v7.blkcount)); >