Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Werner Sembach <wse@tuxedocomputers.com>
To:     dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, hdegoede@redhat.com, tiwai@suse.de,
        samuel@cavoj.net, linux-input@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] Input: i8042 - add additional TUXEDO devices to i8042 quirk tables
Date:   Fri,  8 Jul 2022 18:10:03 +0200
Message-Id: <20220708161005.1251929-1-wse@tuxedocomputers.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

Some additional devices needing i8042 quirks for the keyboard to reliably
work after boot and suspend. The first patch are some older devices I found
needing the quirks in our install routine.

The second patch are two devices that I purposly seperated in an own patch,
because it is not clear cut if these should be applied or not:
They need the quirks for the keyboard to not be completly dead by chance
after suspend. However setting the quirk causes the keyboard to lag for the
first few seconds after every boot and sometimes also a little bit after
resume, giving double inputs or missing keystrokes. However this very
quickly goes away again.
Imho the lag issue is less severe then an occasionally completly dead
keyboard. However I'm interested in other opinions. A counter argument is
that the quirks can always be set via boot parameter, but not unset when
they are part of the quirk list.