From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: Vinod Govindapillai <vinod.govindapillai@intel.com>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: vinod.govindapillai@intel.com, imre.deak@intel.com,
jouni.hogander@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] drm/xe/pm: handle the PME capability and runtime pm routines
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2026 13:03:25 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f5e074540e36b2c9fee11a9bfd14beabcc8cf016@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260903080410.489411-6-vinod.govindapillai@intel.com>
On Thu, 03 Sep 2026, Vinod Govindapillai <vinod.govindapillai@intel.com> wrote:
> During the runtime suspend, check if device is capable of wakeup
> from PME. If yes update the helper so that IRQ reset and HPD
> polling can be handled accordingly. For PME capable devices,
> HPD related IRQs are not reset during runtime suspend and
> do not start polling for HPDs every 10s. Instead PME can be
> generated from HPDs and corresponding runtime resume calls
> can be invoked by PME.
>
> Bspec: 52979, 52980, 68857, 68867, 68970
> Assisted-by: GitHub_Copilot:claude-opus-5
> Signed-off-by: Vinod Govindapillai <vinod.govindapillai@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c | 10 ++++++++++
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.h | 4 ++++
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> 3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
> index 7b25c0814674..ff4a74c5c763 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
> @@ -236,6 +236,16 @@ void xe_display_irq_postinstall(struct xe_device *xe)
> intel_display_irq_postinstall(display);
> }
>
> +void xe_display_set_pme_capable(struct xe_device *xe, bool pme_from_hpd)
> +{
> + struct intel_display *display = xe->display;
> +
> + if (!xe->info.probe_display)
> + return;
> +
> + intel_hpd_set_pme_capable(display, pme_from_hpd);
The downside with this is that I've been trying hard to *reduce* the
number of direct low-level calls from i915 and xe core to display.
There are 100+ calls already. IMO we need to drop them to the ballpark
of less than half.
This would go directly to a TODO list of things to refactor and clean
up.
Feels like it would be more clean with a parent interface for the
display to ask if pme is available, when needed, even though the parent
interface is also too big...
BR,
Jani.
> +}
> +
> static bool suspend_to_idle(void)
> {
> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP)
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.h
> index 0babb50bfc77..a77a8fa1d802 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.h
> @@ -37,6 +37,8 @@ void xe_display_irq_enable(struct xe_device *xe, u32 gu_misc_iir);
> void xe_display_irq_reset(struct xe_device *xe);
> void xe_display_irq_postinstall(struct xe_device *xe);
>
> +void xe_display_set_pme_capable(struct xe_device *xe, bool pme_from_hpd);
> +
> void xe_display_pm_suspend(struct xe_device *xe);
> void xe_display_pm_suspend_late(struct xe_device *xe);
> void xe_display_pm_resume_early(struct xe_device *xe);
> @@ -75,6 +77,8 @@ static inline void xe_display_irq_enable(struct xe_device *xe, u32 gu_misc_iir)
> static inline void xe_display_irq_reset(struct xe_device *xe) {}
> static inline void xe_display_irq_postinstall(struct xe_device *xe) {}
>
> +static inline void xe_display_set_pme_capable(struct xe_device *xe, bool pme_from_hpd) {}
> +
> static inline void xe_display_pm_suspend(struct xe_device *xe) {}
> static inline void xe_display_pm_suspend_late(struct xe_device *xe) {}
> static inline void xe_display_pm_resume_early(struct xe_device *xe) {}
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
> index f8e16aefd2f8..46a33956c5b4 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
> @@ -1385,6 +1385,8 @@ static int xe_pci_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
> {
> struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(dev);
> struct xe_device *xe = pdev_to_xe_device(pdev);
> + pci_power_t state = xe->d3cold.allowed ? PCI_D3cold : PCI_D3hot;
> + bool pme_capable = pci_enable_wake(pdev, state, true) == 0;
> int err;
>
> /*
> @@ -1396,9 +1398,17 @@ static int xe_pci_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
> xe_assert(xe, !IS_SRIOV_VF(xe));
> xe_assert(xe, !pci_num_vf(pdev));
>
> + xe_display_set_pme_capable(xe, pme_capable);
> +
> err = xe_pm_runtime_suspend(xe);
> - if (err)
> + if (err) {
> + if (pme_capable) {
> + pci_enable_wake(pdev, state, false);
> + xe_display_set_pme_capable(xe, false);
> + }
> +
> return err;
> + }
>
> pci_save_state(pdev);
>
> @@ -1419,12 +1429,16 @@ static int xe_pci_runtime_resume(struct device *dev)
> {
> struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(dev);
> struct xe_device *xe = pdev_to_xe_device(pdev);
> + pci_power_t state = xe->d3cold.allowed ? PCI_D3cold : PCI_D3hot;
> int err;
>
> err = pci_set_power_state(pdev, PCI_D0);
> if (err)
> return err;
>
> + pci_enable_wake(pdev, state, false);
> + xe_display_set_pme_capable(xe, false);
> +
> pci_restore_state(pdev);
>
> if (xe->d3cold.allowed) {
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-04 10:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-03 8:04 [PATCH v2 0/5] PM_PME support on display hotplug Vinod Govindapillai
2026-09-03 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] drm/xe/pm: initialize the device's system wakeup capabilities Vinod Govindapillai
2026-09-03 8:15 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-03 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] drm/i915/hotplug: add helpers to track HPDs can generate PME Vinod Govindapillai
2026-09-03 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] drm/i915/irq: conditional HPD IRQ resets based on PME capability Vinod Govindapillai
2026-09-03 8:32 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-04 9:56 ` Jani Nikula
2026-09-04 12:12 ` Govindapillai, Vinod
2026-09-03 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] drm/i915/hotplug: avoid HPD polling if the device is PME capable Vinod Govindapillai
2026-09-03 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] drm/xe/pm: handle the PME capability and runtime pm routines Vinod Govindapillai
2026-09-03 12:36 ` [PATCH v3 " Vinod Govindapillai
2026-09-04 10:03 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2026-09-03 10:26 ` ✓ i915.CI.BAT: success for pm_pme support on display hotplug (rev3) Patchwork
2026-09-03 14:15 ` ✗ i915.CI.BAT: failure for pm_pme support on display hotplug (rev4) Patchwork
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=f5e074540e36b2c9fee11a9bfd14beabcc8cf016@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=imre.deak@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jouni.hogander@intel.com \
--cc=vinod.govindapillai@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox