diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/acpi')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/acpi/DSD-properties-rules.txt | 97 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt | 9 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/acpi/gpio-properties.txt | 62 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/acpi/osi.txt | 187 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/acpi/video_extension.txt | 2 |
5 files changed, 356 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/acpi/DSD-properties-rules.txt b/Documentation/acpi/DSD-properties-rules.txt new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..3e4862bdad98 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/acpi/DSD-properties-rules.txt @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@ +_DSD Device Properties Usage Rules +---------------------------------- + +Properties, Property Sets and Property Subsets +---------------------------------------------- + +The _DSD (Device Specific Data) configuration object, introduced in ACPI 5.1, +allows any type of device configuration data to be provided via the ACPI +namespace. In principle, the format of the data may be arbitrary, but it has to +be identified by a UUID which must be recognized by the driver processing the +_DSD output. However, there are generic UUIDs defined for _DSD recognized by +the ACPI subsystem in the Linux kernel which automatically processes the data +packages associated with them and makes those data available to device drivers +as "device properties". + +A device property is a data item consisting of a string key and a value (of a +specific type) associated with it. + +In the ACPI _DSD context it is an element of the sub-package following the +generic Device Properties UUID in the _DSD return package as specified in the +Device Properties UUID definition document [1]. + +It also may be regarded as the definition of a key and the associated data type +that can be returned by _DSD in the Device Properties UUID sub-package for a +given device. + +A property set is a collection of properties applicable to a hardware entity +like a device. In the ACPI _DSD context it is the set of all properties that +can be returned in the Device Properties UUID sub-package for the device in +question. + +Property subsets are nested collections of properties. Each of them is +associated with an additional key (name) allowing the subset to be referred +to as a whole (and to be treated as a separate entity). The canonical +representation of property subsets is via the mechanism specified in the +Hierarchical Properties Extension UUID definition document [2]. + +Property sets may be hierarchical. That is, a property set may contain +multiple property subsets that each may contain property subsets of its +own and so on. + +General Validity Rule for Property Sets +--------------------------------------- + +Valid property sets must follow the guidance given by the Device Properties UUID +definition document [1]. + +_DSD properties are intended to be used in addition to, and not instead of, the +existing mechanisms defined by the ACPI specification. Therefore, as a rule, +they should only be used if the ACPI specification does not make direct +provisions for handling the underlying use case. It generally is invalid to +return property sets which do not follow that rule from _DSD in data packages +associated with the Device Properties UUID. + +Additional Considerations +------------------------- + +There are cases in which, even if the general rule given above is followed in +principle, the property set may still not be regarded as a valid one. + +For example, that applies to device properties which may cause kernel code +(either a device driver or a library/subsystem) to access hardware in a way +possibly leading to a conflict with AML methods in the ACPI namespace. In +particular, that may happen if the kernel code uses device properties to +manipulate hardware normally controlled by ACPI methods related to power +management, like _PSx and _DSW (for device objects) or _ON and _OFF (for power +resource objects), or by ACPI device disabling/enabling methods, like _DIS and +_SRS. + +In all cases in which kernel code may do something that will confuse AML as a +result of using device properties, the device properties in question are not +suitable for the ACPI environment and consequently they cannot belong to a valid +property set. + +Property Sets and Device Tree Bindings +-------------------------------------- + +It often is useful to make _DSD return property sets that follow Device Tree +bindings. + +In those cases, however, the above validity considerations must be taken into +account in the first place and returning invalid property sets from _DSD must be +avoided. For this reason, it may not be possible to make _DSD return a property +set following the given DT binding literally and completely. Still, for the +sake of code re-use, it may make sense to provide as much of the configuration +data as possible in the form of device properties and complement that with an +ACPI-specific mechanism suitable for the use case at hand. + +In any case, property sets following DT bindings literally should not be +expected to automatically work in the ACPI environment regardless of their +contents. + +References +---------- + +[1] http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/_DSD-device-properties-UUID.pdf +[2] http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/_DSD-hierarchical-data-extension-UUID-v1.1.pdf diff --git a/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt b/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt index a91ec5af52df..209a5eba6b87 100644 --- a/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt +++ b/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt @@ -415,3 +415,12 @@ the "compatible" property in the _DSD or a _CID as long as one of their ancestors provides a _DSD with a valid "compatible" property. Such device objects are then simply regarded as additional "blocks" providing hierarchical configuration information to the driver of the composite ancestor device. + +However, PRP0001 can only be returned from either _HID or _CID of a device +object if all of the properties returned by the _DSD associated with it (either +the _DSD of the device object itself or the _DSD of its ancestor in the +"composite device" case described above) can be used in the ACPI environment. +Otherwise, the _DSD itself is regarded as invalid and therefore the "compatible" +property returned by it is meaningless. + +Refer to DSD-properties-rules.txt for more information. diff --git a/Documentation/acpi/gpio-properties.txt b/Documentation/acpi/gpio-properties.txt index 5aafe0b351a1..2aff0349facd 100644 --- a/Documentation/acpi/gpio-properties.txt +++ b/Documentation/acpi/gpio-properties.txt @@ -51,6 +51,68 @@ it to 1 marks the GPIO as active low. In our Bluetooth example the "reset-gpios" refers to the second GpioIo() resource, second pin in that resource with the GPIO number of 31. +It is possible to leave holes in the array of GPIOs. This is useful in +cases like with SPI host controllers where some chip selects may be +implemented as GPIOs and some as native signals. For example a SPI host +controller can have chip selects 0 and 2 implemented as GPIOs and 1 as +native: + + Package () { + "cs-gpios", + Package () { + ^GPIO, 19, 0, 0, // chip select 0: GPIO + 0, // chip select 1: native signal + ^GPIO, 20, 0, 0, // chip select 2: GPIO + } + } + +Other supported properties +-------------------------- + +Following Device Tree compatible device properties are also supported by +_DSD device properties for GPIO controllers: + +- gpio-hog +- output-high +- output-low +- input +- line-name + +Example: + + Name (_DSD, Package () { + // _DSD Hierarchical Properties Extension UUID + ToUUID("dbb8e3e6-5886-4ba6-8795-1319f52a966b"), + Package () { + Package () {"hog-gpio8", "G8PU"} + } + }) + + Name (G8PU, Package () { + ToUUID("daffd814-6eba-4d8c-8a91-bc9bbf4aa301"), + Package () { + Package () {"gpio-hog", 1}, + Package () {"gpios", Package () {8, 0}}, + Package () {"output-high", 1}, + Package () {"line-name", "gpio8-pullup"}, + } + }) + +- gpio-line-names + +Example: + + Package () { + "gpio-line-names", + Package () { + "SPI0_CS_N", "EXP2_INT", "MUX6_IO", "UART0_RXD", "MUX7_IO", + "LVL_C_A1", "MUX0_IO", "SPI1_MISO" + } + } + +See Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio.txt for more information +about these properties. + ACPI GPIO Mappings Provided by Drivers -------------------------------------- diff --git a/Documentation/acpi/osi.txt b/Documentation/acpi/osi.txt new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..50cde0ceb9b0 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/acpi/osi.txt @@ -0,0 +1,187 @@ +ACPI _OSI and _REV methods +-------------------------- + +An ACPI BIOS can use the "Operating System Interfaces" method (_OSI) +to find out what the operating system supports. Eg. If BIOS +AML code includes _OSI("XYZ"), the kernel's AML interpreter +can evaluate that method, look to see if it supports 'XYZ' +and answer YES or NO to the BIOS. + +The ACPI _REV method returns the "Revision of the ACPI specification +that OSPM supports" + +This document explains how and why the BIOS and Linux should use these methods. +It also explains how and why they are widely misused. + +How to use _OSI +--------------- + +Linux runs on two groups of machines -- those that are tested by the OEM +to be compatible with Linux, and those that were never tested with Linux, +but where Linux was installed to replace the original OS (Windows or OSX). + +The larger group is the systems tested to run only Windows. Not only that, +but many were tested to run with just one specific version of Windows. +So even though the BIOS may use _OSI to query what version of Windows is running, +only a single path through the BIOS has actually been tested. +Experience shows that taking untested paths through the BIOS +exposes Linux to an entire category of BIOS bugs. +For this reason, Linux _OSI defaults must continue to claim compatibility +with all versions of Windows. + +But Linux isn't actually compatible with Windows, and the Linux community +has also been hurt with regressions when Linux adds the latest version of +Windows to its list of _OSI strings. So it is possible that additional strings +will be more thoroughly vetted before shipping upstream in the future. +But it is likely that they will all eventually be added. + +What should an OEM do if they want to support Linux and Windows +using the same BIOS image? Often they need to do something different +for Linux to deal with how Linux is different from Windows. +Here the BIOS should ask exactly what it wants to know: + +_OSI("Linux-OEM-my_interface_name") +where 'OEM' is needed if this is an OEM-specific hook, +and 'my_interface_name' describes the hook, which could be a +quirk, a bug, or a bug-fix. + +In addition, the OEM should send a patch to upstream Linux +via the linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org mailing list. When that patch +is checked into Linux, the OS will answer "YES" when the BIOS +on the OEM's system uses _OSI to ask if the interface is supported +by the OS. Linux distributors can back-port that patch for Linux +pre-installs, and it will be included by all distributions that +re-base to upstream. If the distribution can not update the kernel binary, +they can also add an acpi_osi=Linux-OEM-my_interface_name +cmdline parameter to the boot loader, as needed. + +If the string refers to a feature where the upstream kernel +eventually grows support, a patch should be sent to remove +the string when that support is added to the kernel. + +That was easy. Read on, to find out how to do it wrong. + +Before _OSI, there was _OS +-------------------------- + +ACPI 1.0 specified "_OS" as an +"object that evaluates to a string that identifies the operating system." + +The ACPI BIOS flow would include an evaluation of _OS, and the AML +interpreter in the kernel would return to it a string identifying the OS: + +Windows 98, SE: "Microsoft Windows" +Windows ME: "Microsoft WindowsME:Millenium Edition" +Windows NT: "Microsoft Windows NT" + +The idea was on a platform tasked with running multiple OS's, +the BIOS could use _OS to enable devices that an OS +might support, or enable quirks or bug workarounds +necessary to make the platform compatible with that pre-existing OS. + +But _OS had fundamental problems. First, the BIOS needed to know the name +of every possible version of the OS that would run on it, and needed to know +all the quirks of those OS's. Certainly it would make more sense +for the BIOS to ask *specific* things of the OS, such +"do you support a specific interface", and thus in ACPI 3.0, +_OSI was born to replace _OS. + +_OS was abandoned, though even today, many BIOS look for +_OS "Microsoft Windows NT", though it seems somewhat far-fetched +that anybody would install those old operating systems +over what came with the machine. + +Linux answers "Microsoft Windows NT" to please that BIOS idiom. +That is the *only* viable strategy, as that is what modern Windows does, +and so doing otherwise could steer the BIOS down an untested path. + +_OSI is born, and immediately misused +-------------------------------------- + +With _OSI, the *BIOS* provides the string describing an interface, +and asks the OS: "YES/NO, are you compatible with this interface?" + +eg. _OSI("3.0 Thermal Model") would return TRUE if the OS knows how +to deal with the thermal extensions made to the ACPI 3.0 specification. +An old OS that doesn't know about those extensions would answer FALSE, +and a new OS may be able to return TRUE. + +For an OS-specific interface, the ACPI spec said that the BIOS and the OS +were to agree on a string of the form such as "Windows-interface_name". + +But two bad things happened. First, the Windows ecosystem used _OSI +not as designed, but as a direct replacement for _OS -- identifying +the OS version, rather than an OS supported interface. Indeed, right +from the start, the ACPI 3.0 spec itself codified this misuse +in example code using _OSI("Windows 2001"). + +This misuse was adopted and continues today. + +Linux had no choice but to also return TRUE to _OSI("Windows 2001") +and its successors. To do otherwise would virtually guarantee breaking +a BIOS that has been tested only with that _OSI returning TRUE. + +This strategy is problematic, as Linux is never completely compatible with +the latest version of Windows, and sometimes it takes more than a year +to iron out incompatibilities. + +Not to be out-done, the Linux community made things worse by returning TRUE +to _OSI("Linux"). Doing so is even worse than the Windows misuse +of _OSI, as "Linux" does not even contain any version information. +_OSI("Linux") led to some BIOS' malfunctioning due to BIOS writer's +using it in untested BIOS flows. But some OEM's used _OSI("Linux") +in tested flows to support real Linux features. In 2009, Linux +removed _OSI("Linux"), and added a cmdline parameter to restore it +for legacy systems still needed it. Further a BIOS_BUG warning prints +for all BIOS's that invoke it. + +No BIOS should use _OSI("Linux"). + +The result is a strategy for Linux to maximize compatibility with +ACPI BIOS that are tested on Windows machines. There is a real risk +of over-stating that compatibility; but the alternative has often been +catastrophic failure resulting from the BIOS taking paths that +were never validated under *any* OS. + +Do not use _REV +--------------- + +Since _OSI("Linux") went away, some BIOS writers used _REV +to support Linux and Windows differences in the same BIOS. + +_REV was defined in ACPI 1.0 to return the version of ACPI +supported by the OS and the OS AML interpreter. + +Modern Windows returns _REV = 2. Linux used ACPI_CA_SUPPORT_LEVEL, +which would increment, based on the version of the spec supported. + +Unfortunately, _REV was also misused. eg. some BIOS would check +for _REV = 3, and do something for Linux, but when Linux returned +_REV = 4, that support broke. + +In response to this problem, Linux returns _REV = 2 always, +from mid-2015 onward. The ACPI specification will also be updated +to reflect that _REV is deprecated, and always returns 2. + +Apple Mac and _OSI("Darwin") +---------------------------- + +On Apple's Mac platforms, the ACPI BIOS invokes _OSI("Darwin") +to determine if the machine is running Apple OSX. + +Like Linux's _OSI("*Windows*") strategy, Linux defaults to +answering YES to _OSI("Darwin") to enable full access +to the hardware and validated BIOS paths seen by OSX. +Just like on Windows-tested platforms, this strategy has risks. + +Starting in Linux-3.18, the kernel answered YES to _OSI("Darwin") +for the purpose of enabling Mac Thunderbolt support. Further, +if the kernel noticed _OSI("Darwin") being invoked, it additionally +disabled all _OSI("*Windows*") to keep poorly written Mac BIOS +from going down untested combinations of paths. + +The Linux-3.18 change in default caused power regressions on Mac +laptops, and the 3.18 implementation did not allow changing +the default via cmdline "acpi_osi=!Darwin". Linux-4.7 fixed +the ability to use acpi_osi=!Darwin as a workaround, and +we hope to see Mac Thunderbolt power management support in Linux-4.11. diff --git a/Documentation/acpi/video_extension.txt b/Documentation/acpi/video_extension.txt index 78b32ac02466..79bf6a4921be 100644 --- a/Documentation/acpi/video_extension.txt +++ b/Documentation/acpi/video_extension.txt @@ -101,6 +101,6 @@ received a notification, it will set the backlight level accordingly. This does not affect the sending of event to user space, they are always sent to user space regardless of whether or not the video module controls the backlight level directly. This behaviour can be controlled through the brightness_switch_enabled -module parameter as documented in kernel-parameters.txt. It is recommended to +module parameter as documented in admin-guide/kernel-parameters.rst. It is recommended to disable this behaviour once a GUI environment starts up and wants to have full control of the backlight level. |