From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
Iain Lane <iain@orangesquash.org.uk>,
Shyam-sundar S-k <Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/3] PCI/ACPI: Use device constraints to decide PCI target state fallback policy
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2023 07:57:20 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZMyFMJ/lQKgYZgqa@smile.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f864f6ef-29ae-8cb6-b46c-ee0f32c32fe7@amd.com>
On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 11:37:10PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> On 8/3/23 23:30, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 08:02:29PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
...
> > > + pci_dbg(dev, "ACPI device constraint: %d\n", constraint);
> >
> > Does it make sense before the below check? Why can we be interested in the
> > _exact_ negative values? (Note that non-printing is already a sign that either
> > we don't call this or have negative constraint.)
>
> There are two different negative values that can come up:
> -ENODEV or -EINVAL. Both were interesting while coming up with this series
> because they mean something different about why a constraint wasn't
> selected.
>
> -ENODEV means the constraint wasn't found.
> -EINVAL means the constraint was found but something is wrong with the table
> parser or the table itself. I found the table parser wasn't working
> correctly originaly thanks to this.
>
> Maybe now that I've got it all working you're right and this should go
> after the error checking.
Or maybe moved to the acpi_get_lps0_constraint().
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-04 4:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-04 1:02 [PATCH v9 0/3] Fix wakeup problems on some AMD platforms Mario Limonciello
2023-08-04 1:02 ` [PATCH v9 1/3] ACPI: Add comments to clarify some #ifdef statements Mario Limonciello
2023-08-04 1:02 ` [PATCH v9 2/3] ACPI: x86: s2idle: Adjust constraints logic building Mario Limonciello
2023-08-04 4:31 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-08-04 1:02 ` [PATCH v9 3/3] PCI/ACPI: Use device constraints to decide PCI target state fallback policy Mario Limonciello
2023-08-04 4:30 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-08-04 4:37 ` Mario Limonciello
2023-08-04 4:57 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2023-08-04 13:17 ` Mika Westerberg
2023-08-04 15:56 ` Limonciello, Mario
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=ZMyFMJ/lQKgYZgqa@smile.fi.intel.com \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=iain@orangesquash.org.uk \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.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