From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAA3319CD16 for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2025 15:43:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749483825; cv=none; b=qsQcuxKSme9/Lv/6ftaiCg/gGHjnCOB362CXDz18jTyjDelgIEkk63qLw/KYYbbqtTSftoHD1Hoy5ehVzLY9NaTs/DM3047gEVcP/lWKMYAHJeln1/ks/GLZv5UXsTNu0lrk615SWC9gMxamFugrpZkAmiRKZD6pt7d1X1v9tco= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749483825; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SPYUU/FAcF4/kJDjBI4E7oXouhdHA30mYcI+YTl4+ZY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=nJXnuedeeSCAJwkujm69ChsvCbRXh/tpCA8V4Ew2q8Px0c50yAg9fpMDqsoKo+Tu/3F9XJG61bKb93rnuMkhkWbxlncqYjrd6w0n/50eW3oQ71qd3Nows7f/QJ6CkZF2IX6r93HOBXRDIwHuulKCt8TZfloeNPIiYb0daReLJEI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=mNVJQugo; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="mNVJQugo" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 16CEFC4CEEB; Mon, 9 Jun 2025 15:43:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1749483824; bh=SPYUU/FAcF4/kJDjBI4E7oXouhdHA30mYcI+YTl4+ZY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=mNVJQugo3Vaxc8Z9LKndztH/XQylgx3aw4S3jeYClx37IspmAPYSFDoOqZ74WAuY2 zy9UixjdOMEQbezxS0yXIxFQ+TTWLXHokk0K/N57fwS1iA6UwEkCjIQSmCepQmrlXJ iPGOp5QgUVaXQbVXYyTwerXtzE9k6IPhgiW/Y+17fsInxbeNRMOUxrYfDjUSGU/v0S 79PlrUdKWlaSqJ2uKdn6JDH/YxKnu0xTvb2rVBXswHS8gScsqUTiiANll0zWgP9RIl R4Nr0DNU8OAuv/WrdyO48b7gJPBNfb9nSQjDdfwMugB1B1tJ/qWuAbA3cqFFSacKMv TsQtZAFJ2787w== Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2025 17:43:40 +0200 From: Niklas Cassel To: Hans de Goede Cc: Damien Le Moal , kernel-dev@rsta79.anonaddy.me, Mika Westerberg , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Mario Limonciello Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ata: ahci: Refactor ahci_broken_lpm() Message-ID: References: <20250609134539.943587-3-cassel@kernel.org> <6ea509c8-b38d-4941-8a29-c1117ff3dd5b@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6ea509c8-b38d-4941-8a29-c1117ff3dd5b@redhat.com> Hello Hans, On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 04:49:17PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > On 9-Jun-25 3:45 PM, Niklas Cassel wrote: > > Currently, the match table in ahci_broken_lpm() contains DMI BIOS dates > > of BIOSes that are known to be working. > > > > Having a list of known to be working versions is usually the wrong way to > > do things (as this list could theoretically be infinite). > > > > Refactor this match table to contain DMI BIOS dates of BIOSes that are > > known to not be working, such that this list can be extended with BIOS > > versions (for other boards) that are known to not be working, where there > > is no good BIOS version (because all released versions are broken). > > > > Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel > > --- > > drivers/ata/ahci.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/ahci.c b/drivers/ata/ahci.c > > index 163ac909bd06..a6ce172fa928 100644 > > --- a/drivers/ata/ahci.c > > +++ b/drivers/ata/ahci.c > > @@ -1411,27 +1411,39 @@ static bool ahci_broken_suspend(struct pci_dev *pdev) > > static bool ahci_broken_lpm(struct pci_dev *pdev) > > { > > static const struct dmi_system_id sysids[] = { > > - /* Various Lenovo 50 series have LPM issues with older BIOSen */ > > + /* Table contains DMI BIOS dates of BIOSes with broken LPM. */ > > { > > .matches = { > > DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "LENOVO"), > > DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_VERSION, "ThinkPad X250"), > > }, > > - .driver_data = "20180406", /* 1.31 */ > > + /* > > + * 1.31, released 20180406, has working LPM, mark any > > + * DMI BIOS date before that as broken. > > + */ > > Note the DMI_BIOS_DATE field is the data the BIOS was build, I would avoid > the word "released" here since release-notes doucments often contain different > dates then the actual build date (e.g. see below). Hm... the command to get this date is: $ dmidecode -s bios-release-date So in one way, I think this is the correct term. But indeed, the "release date" in the release notes is usually different from the "dmidecode -s bios-release-date" date, so perhaps just to avoid confusion, using "build date" rather than "released"/"release date" is a good idea. > > > + .driver_data = "20180405", > > }, > > { > > .matches = { > > DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "LENOVO"), > > DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_VERSION, "ThinkPad L450"), > > }, > > - .driver_data = "20180420", /* 1.28 */ > > + /* > > + * 1.28, released 20180420, has working LPM, mark any > > + * DMI BIOS date before that as broken. > > + */ > > + .driver_data = "20180419", > > }, > > { > > .matches = { > > DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "LENOVO"), > > DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_VERSION, "ThinkPad T450s"), > > }, > > - .driver_data = "20180315", /* 1.33 */ > > + /* > > + * 1.33, released 20180315, has working LPM, mark any > > + * DMI BIOS date before that as broken. > > + */ > > + .driver_data = "20180314", > > }, > > { > > .matches = { > > @@ -1439,12 +1451,14 @@ static bool ahci_broken_lpm(struct pci_dev *pdev) > > DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_VERSION, "ThinkPad W541"), > > }, > > /* > > - * Note date based on release notes, 2.35 has been > > - * reported to be good, but I've been unable to get > > - * a hold of the reporter to get the DMI BIOS date. > > - * TODO: fix this. > > + * Note: according to release notes, version 2.35 has > > + * working LPM, but we do not have the DMI BIOS date for > > + * this version, so the date, 20180310, is based on the > > + * release notes. Mark any DMI BIOS date before that as > > + * broken. > > + * TODO: find with date with DMI BIOS date. > > */ > > - .driver_data = "20180310", /* 2.35 */ > > + .driver_data = "20180309", > > This reminds me that I did eventually got the actual BIOS date from > the reporter. After some digging I managed to find the email. > > The first known working BIOS has a BIOS date of 04/09/2018 so that > would become "20180409" before your patch / "20180408" after your patch. > > I guess you may want to add a prep patch before the rest of this > series before this patch to make things a bit cleaner. Thank you! I will send a V2 with the proper date as a patch 1/3. Kind regards, Niklas