From: "Limonciello, Mario" <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
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 v12 9/9] ACPI: x86: s2idle: Enforce LPS0 constraints for PCI devices
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 14:30:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <beb88d67-9437-4d7a-b1b0-a763583df17e@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230817192537.GA322922@bhelgaas>
On 8/17/2023 2:25 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 03:41:43PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
>> Since commit 9d26d3a8f1b0 ("PCI: Put PCIe ports into D3 during suspend")
>> PCIe ports from modern machines (>=2015) are allowed to be put into D3 by
>> storing a value to the `bridge_d3` variable in the `struct pci_dev`
>> structure.
>> ...
>
>> +static void lpi_check_pci_dev(struct lpi_constraints *entry, struct pci_dev *pdev)
>> +{
>> + pci_power_t target = entry->enabled ? entry->min_dstate : PCI_D0;
>> +
>> + if (pdev->current_state == target)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + /* constraint of ACPI D3hot means PCI D3hot _or_ D3cold */
>> + if (target == ACPI_STATE_D3_HOT &&
>
> ACPI_STATE_D3_HOT is not a valid pci_power_t value.
Based on this, kernel robot sparse complaints and your comments on v11's
last patch I am going to split off to another function that returns the
pci_power_t state based upon the situation and better comment the reason
for the D0 when not enabled.
>
>> + (pdev->current_state == PCI_D3hot ||
>> + pdev->current_state == PCI_D3cold))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + if (pm_debug_messages_on)
>> + acpi_handle_info(entry->handle,
>> + "LPI: PCI device in %s, not in %s\n",
>> + acpi_power_state_string(pdev->current_state),
>> + acpi_power_state_string(target));
>> +
>> + /* don't try with things that PCI core hasn't touched */
>> + if (pdev->current_state == PCI_UNKNOWN) {
>> + entry->handle = NULL;
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> + pci_set_power_state(pdev, target);
>
> It doesn't seem logical for a "check_constraints()" function that
> takes no parameters and returns nothing to actively set the PCI power
> state.
>
> lpi_check_constraints() returns nothing, and from the fact that it was
> previously only called when "pm_debug_messages_on", I infer that it
> should have no side effects.
>
> IMHO "lpi_check_constraints" is not a great name because "check"
> doesn't suggest anything specific about what it does.
> "dump_constraints()" -- fine. "log_unmet_constraints()" -- fine
> (seems like the original intention of 726fb6b4f2a8 ("ACPI / PM: Check
> low power idle constraints for debug only"), which added it.
>
Great feedback, thanks. I'm thinking to instead change it to:
lpi_enforce_constraints()
>> +}
>> +
>> static void lpi_check_constraints(void)
>> {
>> struct lpi_constraints *entry;
>>
>> for_each_lpi_constraint(entry) {
>> struct acpi_device *adev = acpi_fetch_acpi_dev(entry->handle);
>> + struct device *dev;
>>
>> if (!adev)
>> continue;
>>
>> + /* Check and adjust PCI devices explicitly */
>> + dev = acpi_get_first_physical_node(adev);
>> + if (dev && dev_is_pci(dev)) {
>> + lpi_check_pci_dev(entry, to_pci_dev(dev));
>> + continue;
>> + }
>> + if (!entry->enabled)
>> + continue;
>> acpi_handle_debug(entry->handle,
>> "LPI: required min power state:%s current power state:%s\n",
>> acpi_power_state_string(entry->min_dstate),
>> acpi_power_state_string(adev->power.state));
>>
>> - if (!adev->flags.power_manageable) {
>> - acpi_handle_info(entry->handle, "LPI: Device not power manageable\n");
>> - entry->handle = NULL;
>> - continue;
>> - }
>> -
>> - if (adev->power.state < entry->min_dstate)
>> + if (pm_debug_messages_on &&
>> + adev->flags.power_manageable &&
>> + adev->power.state < entry->min_dstate)
>> acpi_handle_info(entry->handle,
>> "LPI: Constraint not met; min power state:%s current power state:%s\n",
>> acpi_power_state_string(entry->min_dstate),
>> @@ -512,8 +546,7 @@ int acpi_s2idle_prepare_late(void)
>> if (!lps0_device_handle || sleep_no_lps0)
>> return 0;
>>
>> - if (pm_debug_messages_on)
>> - lpi_check_constraints();
>> + lpi_check_constraints();
>>
>> /* Screen off */
>> if (lps0_dsm_func_mask > 0)
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-17 19:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-16 20:41 [PATCH v12 0/9] Fix wakeup problems on some AMD platforms Mario Limonciello
2023-08-16 20:41 ` [PATCH v12 1/9] ACPI: Add comments to clarify some #ifdef statements Mario Limonciello
2023-08-16 22:36 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2023-08-16 20:41 ` [PATCH v12 2/9] ACPI: Adjust #ifdef for *_lps0_dev use Mario Limonciello
2023-08-16 22:38 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2023-08-16 20:41 ` [PATCH v12 3/9] ACPI: x86: s2idle: Post-increment variables when getting constraints Mario Limonciello
2023-08-17 2:42 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2023-08-17 10:10 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-08-17 15:28 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2023-08-17 15:52 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-08-16 20:41 ` [PATCH v12 4/9] ACPI: x86: s2idle: Catch multiple ACPI_TYPE_PACKAGE objects Mario Limonciello
2023-08-16 20:41 ` [PATCH v12 5/9] ACPI: x86: s2idle: Fix a logic error parsing AMD constraints table Mario Limonciello
2023-08-16 20:41 ` [PATCH v12 6/9] ACPI: x86: s2idle: Add more debugging for AMD constraints parsing Mario Limonciello
2023-08-16 20:41 ` [PATCH v12 7/9] ACPI: x86: s2idle: Store if constraint is enabled Mario Limonciello
2023-08-16 20:41 ` [PATCH v12 8/9] ACPI: x86: s2idle: Add for_each_lpi_constraint() helper Mario Limonciello
2023-08-16 20:41 ` [PATCH v12 9/9] ACPI: x86: s2idle: Enforce LPS0 constraints for PCI devices Mario Limonciello
2023-08-17 5:03 ` kernel test robot
2023-08-17 19:25 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-08-17 19:30 ` Limonciello, Mario [this message]
2023-08-17 19:37 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-08-17 19:40 ` Limonciello, Mario
2023-08-17 19:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-08-17 19:31 ` 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=beb88d67-9437-4d7a-b1b0-a763583df17e@amd.com \
--to=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
--cc=Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.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=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