From: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, shawn.lin@rock-chips.com,
jeffy <jeffy.chen@rock-chips.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dianders@chromium.org,
linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, bhelgaas@google.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] PCI: rockchip: Add support for pcie wake irq
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:20:44 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171222232043.GA158981@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171220191912.GM3875@atomide.com>
+ Rafael to this thread
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 11:19:12AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> [171219 00:50]:
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 09:32:39AM +0800, Jeffy Chen wrote:
> >
> > Did this problem ever get resolved? To be clear, I believe the problem
> > at hand is:
> >
> > (a) in suspend/resume (not runtime PM; we may not even have runtime PM
> > support for most PCI devices)
>
> It seems it should be enough to implement runtime PM in the PCI
> controller. Isn't each PCI WAKE# line is wired from each PCI device
> to the PCI controller?
No, not really. As discussed in later versions of this thread already,
the WAKE# hierarchy is orthogonal to the PCI hierarchy, and I think we
settled that it's reasonable to just consider this as a 1-per-device
thing, with each device "directly" attached to the PM controller. While
sharing could happen, that's something we decided to punt on...didn't
we?
> Then the PCI controller can figure out from which PCI device the
> WAKE# came from.
I'm not completely sure of the details, but I believe this *can* be
determined by PME. But I'm not sure it's guaranteed to be supported,
especially in cases where we already have 1:1 WAKE#. So we should be
*trying* to report this wakeirq info from the device, if possible.
> > Options I can think of:
> > (1) implement runtime PM callbacks for all PCI devices, where we clear
> > any PME status and ensure WAKE# stops asserting [1]
>
> I don't think this is needed, it should be enough to have just
> the PCI controller implement runtime PM :)
Brian
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Cc: jeffy <jeffy.chen@rock-chips.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com,
shawn.lin@rock-chips.com, dianders@chromium.org,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] PCI: rockchip: Add support for pcie wake irq
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:20:44 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171222232043.GA158981@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171220191912.GM3875@atomide.com>
+ Rafael to this thread
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 11:19:12AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> [171219 00:50]:
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 09:32:39AM +0800, Jeffy Chen wrote:
> >
> > Did this problem ever get resolved? To be clear, I believe the problem
> > at hand is:
> >
> > (a) in suspend/resume (not runtime PM; we may not even have runtime PM
> > support for most PCI devices)
>
> It seems it should be enough to implement runtime PM in the PCI
> controller. Isn't each PCI WAKE# line is wired from each PCI device
> to the PCI controller?
No, not really. As discussed in later versions of this thread already,
the WAKE# hierarchy is orthogonal to the PCI hierarchy, and I think we
settled that it's reasonable to just consider this as a 1-per-device
thing, with each device "directly" attached to the PM controller. While
sharing could happen, that's something we decided to punt on...didn't
we?
> Then the PCI controller can figure out from which PCI device the
> WAKE# came from.
I'm not completely sure of the details, but I believe this *can* be
determined by PME. But I'm not sure it's guaranteed to be supported,
especially in cases where we already have 1:1 WAKE#. So we should be
*trying* to report this wakeirq info from the device, if possible.
> > Options I can think of:
> > (1) implement runtime PM callbacks for all PCI devices, where we clear
> > any PME status and ensure WAKE# stops asserting [1]
>
> I don't think this is needed, it should be enough to have just
> the PCI controller implement runtime PM :)
Brian
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: briannorris@chromium.org (Brian Norris)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] PCI: rockchip: Add support for pcie wake irq
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:20:44 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171222232043.GA158981@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171220191912.GM3875@atomide.com>
+ Rafael to this thread
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 11:19:12AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> [171219 00:50]:
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 09:32:39AM +0800, Jeffy Chen wrote:
> >
> > Did this problem ever get resolved? To be clear, I believe the problem
> > at hand is:
> >
> > (a) in suspend/resume (not runtime PM; we may not even have runtime PM
> > support for most PCI devices)
>
> It seems it should be enough to implement runtime PM in the PCI
> controller. Isn't each PCI WAKE# line is wired from each PCI device
> to the PCI controller?
No, not really. As discussed in later versions of this thread already,
the WAKE# hierarchy is orthogonal to the PCI hierarchy, and I think we
settled that it's reasonable to just consider this as a 1-per-device
thing, with each device "directly" attached to the PM controller. While
sharing could happen, that's something we decided to punt on...didn't
we?
> Then the PCI controller can figure out from which PCI device the
> WAKE# came from.
I'm not completely sure of the details, but I believe this *can* be
determined by PME. But I'm not sure it's guaranteed to be supported,
especially in cases where we already have 1:1 WAKE#. So we should be
*trying* to report this wakeirq info from the device, if possible.
> > Options I can think of:
> > (1) implement runtime PM callbacks for all PCI devices, where we clear
> > any PME status and ensure WAKE# stops asserting [1]
>
> I don't think this is needed, it should be enough to have just
> the PCI controller implement runtime PM :)
Brian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-22 23:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-17 12:04 [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] PCI: rockchip: Move PCIE_WAKE handling into rockchip pcie driver Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04 ` Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04 ` Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] PCI: rockchip: Add support for pcie wake irq Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04 ` Jeffy Chen
2017-08-18 7:23 ` Shawn Lin
2017-08-18 7:23 ` Shawn Lin
2017-08-18 7:23 ` Shawn Lin
2017-08-18 8:32 ` jeffy
2017-08-18 8:32 ` jeffy
2017-08-18 8:32 ` jeffy
2017-08-18 17:01 ` Brian Norris
2017-08-18 17:01 ` Brian Norris
2017-08-18 17:01 ` Brian Norris
2017-08-18 17:07 ` Brian Norris
2017-08-18 17:07 ` Brian Norris
2017-08-18 17:07 ` Brian Norris
2017-08-18 17:47 ` jeffy
2017-08-18 17:47 ` jeffy
2017-08-18 17:47 ` jeffy
2017-08-18 18:28 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-18 18:28 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-18 18:28 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-18 18:14 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-18 18:14 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-18 18:14 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-18 20:05 ` jeffy
2017-08-18 20:05 ` jeffy
2017-08-18 20:05 ` jeffy
2017-08-22 17:26 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-22 17:26 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-22 17:26 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-23 1:32 ` jeffy
2017-08-23 1:32 ` jeffy
2017-08-23 1:57 ` Brian Norris
2017-08-23 1:57 ` Brian Norris
2017-08-23 1:57 ` Brian Norris
2017-08-23 2:16 ` jeffy
2017-08-23 2:16 ` jeffy
2017-08-23 2:16 ` jeffy
2017-12-19 0:48 ` Brian Norris
2017-12-19 0:48 ` Brian Norris
2017-12-19 0:48 ` Brian Norris
2017-12-20 19:19 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-12-20 19:19 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-12-22 23:20 ` Brian Norris [this message]
2017-12-22 23:20 ` Brian Norris
2017-12-22 23:20 ` Brian Norris
2017-12-23 16:36 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-12-23 16:36 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-12-23 16:36 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-17 12:04 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/3] dt-bindings: " Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04 ` Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] arm64: dts: rockchip: Handle pcie wake in pcie driver for Gru Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04 ` Jeffy Chen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20171222232043.GA158981@google.com \
--to=briannorris@chromium.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=heiko@sntech.de \
--cc=jeffy.chen@rock-chips.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=shawn.lin@rock-chips.com \
--cc=tony@atomide.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.