View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0015707CentOS-7kernelpublic2019-02-06 05:46
ReporterFighter19 
PrioritynormalSeverityminorReproducibilityalways
Status assignedResolutionopen 
Product Version7.6.1810 
Target VersionFixed in Version 
Summary0015707: Volume (and wireless) keys not working after upgrade
DescriptionWhen switching from 3.10.0-862.14.4 to
the newest kernel (3.10.0-956.1.3),
the volume keys become unresponsive.
(asus-nb-wmi is the module responsible for this, afaik).

Also using the presenter key now results in an
unrecoverable black screen (not sure if related to the other keys, but also triggered by new kernel).

Steps To ReproduceUpgrade to kernel 3.10.0-956.1.3
Try using volume up, down, mute, touchpad, wireless on a K73SV
Additional InformationMy laptop is a K73SV from ASUS.
(Brightness up, down, disable screen are not affected)
Booting with the old kernel makes the keys work again.
Tags3.10.0-956.1.3
abrt_hash
URL

Activities

Fighter19

Fighter19

2019-01-15 00:43

reporter  

workingkernel.log (64,860 bytes)
newkernel.log (65,127 bytes)
toracat

toracat

2019-01-15 01:23

manager   ~0033585

What is your wireless device?

lspci -nn | grep -i net
Fighter19

Fighter19

2019-01-15 01:48

reporter   ~0033586

I meant to refer to the key toggling the wireless functionality, sorry for being unclear.
Either way it's:
Ralink corp. RT5390 Wireless 802.11n 1T/1R PCIe [1969:1083] (rev c0)
Fighter19

Fighter19

2019-01-15 01:50

reporter   ~0033587

Sorry, mixed up the lines, this is the actual card:
03:00.0 Network controller [0280]: Ralink corp. RT5390 Wireless 802.11n 1T/1R PCIe [1814:5390]
Fighter19

Fighter19

2019-01-15 03:01

reporter   ~0033588

Ok, I've downloaded the kernel sources I know the module is working on, and have recompiled
the module of 862 against the new headers of 956.

It makes no difference.
I could limit it to the function
"asus_wmi_evaluate_method" returning -5 (-EIO) as wmi_evaluate_method apparently returns without success
asus-wmi.c:275

This function (wmi_evaluate_method) returns successfully with the old kernels while it fails with the newer one.
Fighter19

Fighter19

2019-01-15 03:21

reporter   ~0033589

I have built the wmi module from 862 for 956.
This version works and the asus_wmi module from 956 also loads correctly this way.
toracat

toracat

2019-01-15 19:57

manager   ~0033595

Glad that you've got the way to fix the problem.

If I understand your procedure, you built the modules using the source code from the 862 kernel under CentOS 7.6 (-957):

asus-laptop.ko
asus-nb-wmi.ko
asus-wmi.ko
wmi.ko

Of which wmi.ko made the difference. Is this correct ?
Fighter19

Fighter19

2019-01-15 23:24

reporter   ~0033596

Yes, that's correct.
I've built the modules from the 862 kernel under 957:
asus-nb-wmi.ko
asus-wmi.ko
wmi.ko

Then found, that by replacing the 957 version of wmi.ko with the 862 version built for 957,
fixes the issue.

If it helps I found that wmi_evaluate_method returns 0x1001
(Programmer exception and Bad parameter, if I'm not mistaken) with the 957 version, while it successfully returns with 862.
Fighter19

Fighter19

2019-01-15 23:25

reporter   ~0033597

I only replaced the
wmi.ko in the end without rebuilding the other modules, though.
Fighter19

Fighter19

2019-01-15 23:27

reporter   ~0033598

To be clear:
Current setup (working):
asus-laptop.ko(957) (not loaded, so probably irrelevant)
asus-nb-wmi.ko(957)
asus-wmi.ko(957)
wmi.ko(862)
kernel (862)
Fighter19

Fighter19

2019-01-15 23:28

reporter   ~0033599

Sorry,
kernel (957)
I hope I don't spam your inbox.
If I did I'm sorry.
toracat

toracat

2019-01-16 08:44

manager   ~0033603

Last edited: 2019-01-16 20:19

View 3 revisions

This kind of 'spam' is welcome.

Now only if we can find a fix for the issue. This is something that needs reporting upstream at http://bugzilla.redhat.com .

[EDIT] What I meant by a "fix" is a "kernel patch" to fix the issue.

toracat

toracat

2019-01-16 20:28

manager   ~0033608

@Fighter19

Could you run some tests? I want you to try and see if the newer kernels from kernel.org have this problem fixed. You can use kernel-lt (4.4.x) or kernel-ml (4.20.x) from ELRepo:

http://elrepo.org/tiki/kernel-lt
http://elrepo.org/tiki/kernel-ml
pgreco

pgreco

2019-01-16 22:24

developer   ~0033610

@Fighter19, with your great analysis, I suspect this should fix your problem https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=0fe57261214bcc866ef0233444a395b5fdfb5ac3
If we build un unsigned version of the kernel-plus, would you be able to test it?

Pablo.
toracat

toracat

2019-01-17 00:35

manager   ~0033611

@Fighter19

A set of centosplus kernel with @pgreco's patch is now available from:

https://people.centos.org/toracat/kernel/7/plus/bug15707/

If you wish to do a 'quick and dirty' check with the modules, they can be found here:

https://people.centos.org/toracat/kernel/7/bugs/15707/
Fighter19

Fighter19

2019-01-17 18:04

reporter   ~0033617

Thank you,
I've tried the 'quick and dirty' check with the modules.
It seems that this patch fixes the problems.
Fighter19

Fighter19

2019-01-17 18:23

reporter   ~0033618

I've installed the patched centosplus kernel.
The keys also work with this one.

Although following packages could not be installed due to conflicts with their "normal" kernel counterparts:
  kernel-plus-headers.x86_64 0:3.10.0-957.1.3.el7.centos.plus.bug15707 kernel-plus-tools.x86_64 0:3.10.0-957.1.3.el7.centos.plus.bug15707
  kernel-plus-tools-libs.x86_64 0:3.10.0-957.1.3.el7.centos.plus.bug15707 kernel-plus-tools-libs-devel.x86_64 0:3.10.0-957.1.3.el7.centos.plus.bug15707

But I guess this is not an issue.
toracat

toracat

2019-01-17 18:27

manager   ~0033619

@Fighter19

That's great news. @pgreco will be filing a bug report upstream. :)
toracat

toracat

2019-01-17 18:29

manager   ~0033620

@Fighter19

Sorry, I did not make it clear. You do not need to install the -header package. It is designed to conflict with the distro kernel.
toracat

toracat

2019-01-17 18:32

manager   ~0033621

Also, future updates to the plus kernel will have the patch. So if you keep using it, you don't have to build the modules yourself. Hopefully the patch gets added to the upstream (RHEL) kernel, so the CentOS distro kernel gets it, too.
pgreco

pgreco

2019-01-17 19:29

developer   ~0033624

@toracat bug filed upstream https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1667232
@Fighter19 do you have bugzilla.redhat.com account so you can follow the progress there?
Fighter19

Fighter19

2019-01-17 23:32

reporter   ~0033628

I just created one, however I'm unable to see the page there.
pgreco

pgreco

2019-01-18 00:01

developer   ~0033629

@Fighter19 Yeap, that is why I asked. Kernel bugs are automatically marked as "private", so only people in the cc list can read (apart from RH developers).
If you send me the mail you used to register, I can add you to the cc.
toracat

toracat

2019-01-31 18:31

manager   ~0033742

kernel-plus-3.10.0-957.5.1.el7.centos.plus now has the patch.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2019-01-15 00:43 Fighter19 New Issue
2019-01-15 00:43 Fighter19 File Added: workingkernel.log
2019-01-15 00:43 Fighter19 File Added: newkernel.log
2019-01-15 00:43 Fighter19 Tag Attached: 3.10.0-956.1.3
2019-01-15 01:23 toracat Note Added: 0033585
2019-01-15 01:48 Fighter19 Note Added: 0033586
2019-01-15 01:50 Fighter19 Note Added: 0033587
2019-01-15 03:01 Fighter19 Note Added: 0033588
2019-01-15 03:21 Fighter19 Note Added: 0033589
2019-01-15 19:57 toracat Note Added: 0033595
2019-01-15 19:58 toracat Status new => acknowledged
2019-01-15 19:58 toracat Description Updated View Revisions
2019-01-15 19:58 toracat Steps to Reproduce Updated View Revisions
2019-01-15 19:58 toracat Additional Information Updated View Revisions
2019-01-15 23:24 Fighter19 Note Added: 0033596
2019-01-15 23:25 Fighter19 Note Added: 0033597
2019-01-15 23:27 Fighter19 Note Added: 0033598
2019-01-15 23:28 Fighter19 Note Added: 0033599
2019-01-16 08:44 toracat Note Added: 0033603
2019-01-16 20:10 toracat Note Edited: 0033603 View Revisions
2019-01-16 20:19 toracat Note Edited: 0033603 View Revisions
2019-01-16 20:28 toracat Note Added: 0033608
2019-01-16 22:24 pgreco Note Added: 0033610
2019-01-17 00:35 toracat Note Added: 0033611
2019-01-17 00:35 toracat Status acknowledged => feedback
2019-01-17 18:04 Fighter19 Note Added: 0033617
2019-01-17 18:04 Fighter19 Status feedback => assigned
2019-01-17 18:23 Fighter19 Note Added: 0033618
2019-01-17 18:27 toracat Note Added: 0033619
2019-01-17 18:29 toracat Note Added: 0033620
2019-01-17 18:32 toracat Note Added: 0033621
2019-01-17 19:29 pgreco Note Added: 0033624
2019-01-17 23:32 Fighter19 Note Added: 0033628
2019-01-18 00:01 pgreco Note Added: 0033629
2019-01-31 18:31 toracat Note Added: 0033742