From: "Kasagar, Srinidhi" <srinidhi.kasagar@intel.com>
To: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com,
Kumar P Mahesh <mahesh.kumar.p@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI / LPSS: Ignore 10ms delay for Braswell and Baytrail
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 17:46:21 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150821121621.GB26813@intel-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150820130447.GA1337@kuha.fi.intel.com>
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 04:04:47PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 03:38:05PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > +Heikki
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:46:07PM +0530, Srinidhi Kasagar wrote:
> > > LPSS devices in Braswell and Baytrail does not need the default
> > > 10ms d3_delay imposed by PCI specification. Removing this
> > > unnecessary delay significantly reduces the resume time
> > > (~200ms on Braswell/Cherrytrail) on these platforms.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Srinidhi Kasagar <srinidhi.kasagar@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Kumar P Mahesh <mahesh.kumar.p@intel.com>
> >
> > Have you tested this on Asus T100? The delay was actually needed in
> > order to restore the context IIRC.
>
> We need to make sure the write operation succeeded when restoring the
> register values. That was the problem we had with T100, which btw. is
> Baytrail.
>
> Instead of using the delay conditionally, why not just read the value
> back in a loop (with timeout of course) until we see the write
> succeed? That should speedup the resume like you want, but still
> guarantee the ctx has really been restored.
I would love to do that. But these are PCI devices and the delay
is imposed by PCI spec and in many other places these conditional
delays have been used. I do not think there exist any mechanism to
verify write succeeds.
Srinidhi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-21 4:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1440090968-17728-1-git-send-email-srinidhi.kasagar@intel.com>
2015-08-20 12:38 ` [PATCH] ACPI / LPSS: Ignore 10ms delay for Braswell and Baytrail Mika Westerberg
2015-08-20 13:04 ` Heikki Krogerus
2015-08-21 12:16 ` Kasagar, Srinidhi [this message]
2015-08-21 12:11 ` Kasagar, Srinidhi
2015-08-21 6:36 ` Mika Westerberg
2015-08-21 13:20 ` Mika Westerberg
2015-08-24 12:51 ` Kasagar, Srinidhi
2015-08-24 8:59 ` Mika Westerberg
2015-08-24 17:09 ` Kasagar, Srinidhi
2015-08-24 9:44 ` Mika Westerberg
2015-08-27 14:39 ` Kasagar, Srinidhi
2015-08-27 7:14 ` Mika Westerberg
2015-08-27 16:13 ` Kasagar, Srinidhi
2015-08-27 8:30 ` Mika Westerberg
2015-08-27 17:26 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=20150821121621.GB26813@intel-desktop \
--to=srinidhi.kasagar@intel.com \
--cc=heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mahesh.kumar.p@intel.com \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).