Hi Brad,
G'day Henrik,
Which kernel was this based on? It won't apply to my 5.9 tree.
I was being lazy and applied the diff to linus/master on top of my
current stable branch. More importantly, I sent the mail out from an
email client that may not format the patch properly; I'll fix that.
On 8/11/20 5:31 am, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> On 2020-11-06 21:02, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
>>> So as it stands, it does not work at all. I will continue to check another
>>> machine, and see if I can get something working.
>>
>> On the MacBookAir3,1 the situation is somewhat better.
>>
>> The first
On 2020-11-06 21:02, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
So as it stands, it does not work at all. I will continue to check
another machine, and see if I can get something working.
On the MacBookAir3,1 the situation is somewhat better.
The first three tree positions result in zero failures and 10 reads per
On 7/11/20 3:26 am, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
>>> I can't guarantee it won't break older machines which is why I've asked for
>>> help testing it. I only have a MacbookPro 11,1 and an iMac 12,2. It fixes
>>> both of those.
>>>
>>> Help testing would be much appreciated.
>>
>> I see, this makes much
So as it stands, it does not work at all. I will continue to check
another machine, and see if I can get something working.
On the MacBookAir3,1 the situation is somewhat better.
The first three tree positions result in zero failures and 10 reads per
second. The fourth yields zero failues and
I can't guarantee it won't break older machines which is why I've
asked for help testing it. I only have a MacbookPro 11,1 and an iMac
12,2. It fixes both of those.
Help testing would be much appreciated.
I see, this makes much more sense. I may be able to run some tests
tonight. Meanwhile,
On 11/5/20 4:02 PM, Brad Campbell wrote:
[ ... ]
>>> +/* Apple SMC status bits */
>>> +#define SMC_STATUS_AWAITING_DATA BIT(0) /* SMC has data waiting */
>>> +#define SMC_STATUS_IB_CLOSED BIT(1) /* Will ignore any input */
>>> +#define SMC_STATUS_BUSY BIT(2) /* Command in progress
On 6/11/20 3:12 am, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 11/4/20 11:26 PM, Brad Campbell wrote:
>> Commit fff2d0f701e6 ("hwmon: (applesmc) avoid overlong udelay()") introduced
>> an issue whereby communication with the SMC became unreliable with write
>> errors like :
>>
>> [ 120.378614] applesmc:
On 11/4/20 11:26 PM, Brad Campbell wrote:
> Commit fff2d0f701e6 ("hwmon: (applesmc) avoid overlong udelay()") introduced
> an issue whereby communication with the SMC became unreliable with write
> errors like :
>
> [ 120.378614] applesmc: send_byte(0x00, 0x0300) fail: 0x40
> [ 120.378621]
On 2020-11-05 09:30, Brad Campbell wrote:
On 5/11/20 6:56 pm, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
Hi Brad,
Great to see this effort, it is certainly an area which could be improved.
After having seen several generations of Macbooks while modifying much of that
code, it became clear that the SMC
On 5/11/20 6:56 pm, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> Hi Brad,
>
> Great to see this effort, it is certainly an area which could be improved.
> After having seen several generations of Macbooks while modifying much of
> that code, it became clear that the SMC communication got refreshed a few
> times
On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 08:56:04 +0100
Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> Hi Brad,
>
> Great to see this effort, it is certainly an area which could be
> improved. After having seen several generations of Macbooks while
> modifying much of that code, it became clear that the SMC communication
> got
On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 18:26:24 +1100
Brad Campbell wrote:
> Commit fff2d0f701e6 ("hwmon: (applesmc) avoid overlong udelay()") introduced
> an issue whereby communication with the SMC became unreliable with write
> errors like :
>
> [ 120.378614] applesmc: send_byte(0x00, 0x0300) fail: 0x40
> [
Hi Brad,
Great to see this effort, it is certainly an area which could be
improved. After having seen several generations of Macbooks while
modifying much of that code, it became clear that the SMC communication
got refreshed a few times over the years. Every tiny change had to be
tested on
Commit fff2d0f701e6 ("hwmon: (applesmc) avoid overlong udelay()") introduced
an issue whereby communication with the SMC became unreliable with write
errors like :
[ 120.378614] applesmc: send_byte(0x00, 0x0300) fail: 0x40
[ 120.378621] applesmc: LKSB: write data fail
[ 120.512782] applesmc:
15 matches
Mail list logo