drivers/mfd/intel-lpss-acpi.c | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
The Dell Latitude 7275 2-in-1 has the same BIOS bug as the Latitude 5285:
the ACPI GEXP device declares an OperationRegion (BAR0) on the GNVS
variable SB04 and the I2C4 controller (INT3446) builds its _CRS from that
same variable, so intel_lpss_acpi fails to bind the controller with
-EBUSY and the front camera sensor (OV5670, INT3479) is never registered
unless acpi_enforce_resources=lax is passed.
Add the machine to the DMI table so QUIRK_IGNORE_RESOURCE_CONFLICTS is
applied to INT3446 on it as well.
Assisted-by: Claude Code:claude-fable-5-1
Signed-off-by: D. Manresa <dmanresa@gmail.com>
---
Applies on top of "mfd: intel-lpss: add resource conflict quirk for Dell
Latitude 5285" from Thierry Chatard's v10 series [1]. Thierry, feel free
to fold this into v11 instead if you prefer.
The conflict was verified in the 7275 DSDT (BIOS 1.18.0): GEXP has
OperationRegion (BAR0, SystemMemory, SB04, 0x0208) and INT3446._CRS
returns LCRS (SMD4, SB04, SIR4). With acpi_enforce_resources=lax, which
has the same effect as the quirk, the controller binds and the camera
works with the board data from "platform/x86: int3472: Add TPS68470 board
data for Dell Latitude 7275" [2]. The distribution kernel here builds
intel-lpss-acpi in, so this exact patch has not been run yet.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/20260831160754.9857-2-tchatard@gmail.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/platform-driver-x86/20260908161445.334910-1-dmanresa@gmail.com/
drivers/mfd/intel-lpss-acpi.c | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
--- a/drivers/mfd/intel-lpss-acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/intel-lpss-acpi.c
@@ -191,6 +191,12 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id intel_lpss_quirk_dmi[] = {
DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "Latitude 5285"),
},
},
+ {
+ .matches = {
+ DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Dell Inc."),
+ DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "Latitude 7275"),
+ },
+ },
{ }
};
On Tue, Sep 08, 2026 at 06:16:29PM +0200, D. Manresa wrote: > The Dell Latitude 7275 2-in-1 has the same BIOS bug as the Latitude 5285: > the ACPI GEXP device declares an OperationRegion (BAR0) on the GNVS > variable SB04 and the I2C4 controller (INT3446) builds its _CRS from that > same variable, so intel_lpss_acpi fails to bind the controller with > -EBUSY and the front camera sensor (OV5670, INT3479) is never registered > unless acpi_enforce_resources=lax is passed. > > Add the machine to the DMI table so QUIRK_IGNORE_RESOURCE_CONFLICTS is > applied to INT3446 on it as well. > > Assisted-by: Claude Code:claude-fable-5-1 > Signed-off-by: D. Manresa <dmanresa@gmail.com> > --- > Applies on top of "mfd: intel-lpss: add resource conflict quirk for Dell > Latitude 5285" from Thierry Chatard's v10 series [1]. Thierry, feel free > to fold this into v11 instead if you prefer. Do not fold, just add into the series this one as patch 2, for example. > The conflict was verified in the 7275 DSDT (BIOS 1.18.0): GEXP has > OperationRegion (BAR0, SystemMemory, SB04, 0x0208) and INT3446._CRS > returns LCRS (SMD4, SB04, SIR4). With acpi_enforce_resources=lax, which > has the same effect as the quirk, the controller binds and the camera > works with the board data from "platform/x86: int3472: Add TPS68470 board > data for Dell Latitude 7275" [2]. The distribution kernel here builds > intel-lpss-acpi in, so this exact patch has not been run yet. The patches still need an Ack from Lee. > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/20260831160754.9857-2-tchatard@gmail.com/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/platform-driver-x86/20260908161445.334910-1-dmanresa@gmail.com/ -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
On Wed, 9 Sep 2026, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > Do not fold, just add into the series this one as patch 2, for example. Fine by me. Thierry, please carry it as patch 2 of v11 with Hans' Reviewed-by; no need to change anything else. Thanks Hans and Andy for the quick review. D.
On Wed, 09 Sep 2026, D. Manresa wrote: > On Wed, 9 Sep 2026, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > Do not fold, just add into the series this one as patch 2, for example. > > Fine by me. Thierry, please carry it as patch 2 of v11 with Hans' > Reviewed-by; no need to change anything else. Why can't I just apply it? -- Lee Jones
On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 04:10:27PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > On Wed, 09 Sep 2026, D. Manresa wrote: > > > On Wed, 9 Sep 2026, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > Do not fold, just add into the series this one as patch 2, for example. > > > > Fine by me. Thierry, please carry it as patch 2 of v11 with Hans' > > Reviewed-by; no need to change anything else. > > Why can't I just apply it? This patch on its own can't be applied as it relies on the one in the other series. You can apply both patches, from that series and this one. No objections from my side. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
On Wed, 09 Sep 2026, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 04:10:27PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Wed, 09 Sep 2026, D. Manresa wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 9 Sep 2026, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > Do not fold, just add into the series this one as patch 2, for example. > > > > > > Fine by me. Thierry, please carry it as patch 2 of v11 with Hans' > > > Reviewed-by; no need to change anything else. > > > > Why can't I just apply it? > > This patch on its own can't be applied as it relies on the one > in the other series. You can apply both patches, from that series > and this one. No objections from my side. What is the hard / build dep. I can't see it. -- Lee Jones
On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 10:47:44AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > On Wed, 09 Sep 2026, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 04:10:27PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > On Wed, 09 Sep 2026, D. Manresa wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, 9 Sep 2026, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > Do not fold, just add into the series this one as patch 2, for example. > > > > > > > > Fine by me. Thierry, please carry it as patch 2 of v11 with Hans' > > > > Reviewed-by; no need to change anything else. > > > > > > Why can't I just apply it? > > > > This patch on its own can't be applied as it relies on the one > > in the other series. You can apply both patches, from that series > > and this one. No objections from my side. > > What is the hard / build dep. I can't see it. Build dep. The patch from Thierry's series introduces quirk table in intel-lpss-acpi.c (currently none, at least in Linux Next), this one is made on top, it simply may not be applied even if the other is not there. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
Hi Lee, On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 04:10:27PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > On Wed, 09 Sep 2026, D. Manresa wrote: > > > On Wed, 9 Sep 2026, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > Do not fold, just add into the series this one as patch 2, for example. > > > > Fine by me. Thierry, please carry it as patch 2 of v11 with Hans' > > Reviewed-by; no need to change anything else. > > Why can't I just apply it? There are no direct dependencies to the rest. For the functionality, it might be nice to merge it via one tree and the rest of the set would go in via the media tree. In case you prefer to merge the patch, Reviewed-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> -- Regards, Sakari Ailus
Hi,
On 8-Sep-26 18:16, D. Manresa wrote:
> The Dell Latitude 7275 2-in-1 has the same BIOS bug as the Latitude 5285:
> the ACPI GEXP device declares an OperationRegion (BAR0) on the GNVS
> variable SB04 and the I2C4 controller (INT3446) builds its _CRS from that
> same variable, so intel_lpss_acpi fails to bind the controller with
> -EBUSY and the front camera sensor (OV5670, INT3479) is never registered
> unless acpi_enforce_resources=lax is passed.
>
> Add the machine to the DMI table so QUIRK_IGNORE_RESOURCE_CONFLICTS is
> applied to INT3446 on it as well.
>
> Assisted-by: Claude Code:claude-fable-5-1
> Signed-off-by: D. Manresa <dmanresa@gmail.com>
Thanks, patch looks good to me:
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <johannes.goede@oss.qualcomm.com>
Regards,
Hans
> ---
> Applies on top of "mfd: intel-lpss: add resource conflict quirk for Dell
> Latitude 5285" from Thierry Chatard's v10 series [1]. Thierry, feel free
> to fold this into v11 instead if you prefer.
>
> The conflict was verified in the 7275 DSDT (BIOS 1.18.0): GEXP has
> OperationRegion (BAR0, SystemMemory, SB04, 0x0208) and INT3446._CRS
> returns LCRS (SMD4, SB04, SIR4). With acpi_enforce_resources=lax, which
> has the same effect as the quirk, the controller binds and the camera
> works with the board data from "platform/x86: int3472: Add TPS68470 board
> data for Dell Latitude 7275" [2]. The distribution kernel here builds
> intel-lpss-acpi in, so this exact patch has not been run yet.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/20260831160754.9857-2-tchatard@gmail.com/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/platform-driver-x86/20260908161445.334910-1-dmanresa@gmail.com/
>
> drivers/mfd/intel-lpss-acpi.c | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> --- a/drivers/mfd/intel-lpss-acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/intel-lpss-acpi.c
> @@ -191,6 +191,12 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id intel_lpss_quirk_dmi[] = {
> DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "Latitude 5285"),
> },
> },
> + {
> + .matches = {
> + DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Dell Inc."),
> + DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "Latitude 7275"),
> + },
> + },
> { }
> };
>
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.