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 B2E1352F6F for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 07:38:31 +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=1706686711; cv=none; b=hVQR0DP57w3lUTwuwCzunGfNI+Uf4dBqa839ZrY3RuOqp9DcP3pM6J/OSZ0Yf7CZeMaH66PWxHo/dMiRm5S/pSn4z/QpEusF9xo5UW2ldvvWEmCeKrfyqCKVfN6ULa9mMgMuPSXTUYpHAahrXeRX8rWI3DSwkSqZIU1HMbcuMpg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706686711; c=relaxed/simple; bh=f0Gu/cyfDSzPqnKlxnlRGsqamvy0PevxKq7skAXsbfU=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=X4bqAiDw2hN27JbiV4CY9RFNSot6snd/AsZCYngsB0shdgzIgj94A/Y/6UGkw63n2lVXvBrxLNy7Uh6f8xkAxM4NgG9bY2MUXTMvya5Jk9lDpdwvJr79sqJQ1U1J/TJY0aGpVgjwdhT3gBgCeoMylhuFVxYjq6lSCr7K0nrnXik= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=nyiC5PI0; 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="nyiC5PI0" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3525EC43390; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 07:38:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1706686710; bh=f0Gu/cyfDSzPqnKlxnlRGsqamvy0PevxKq7skAXsbfU=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=nyiC5PI0MnggnRMrNQZEcBH2HUqCoJDPE7DyFwB1kOhXlaRGr8lC8M+pzY7jeGl01 EYgEXhAMSrkAqzjW12wIZi0qKQ9Lgx95OwQ1L0fLyBj72Uemmrrbu9NBtdR/XLdJCn sIQXI5rgMol0bKGXJTV52iWmUeCDQzP5PXhQakNiwdx3kXnwbajAbyINDwoB2g+vTX t1cikWdIJi+lV2tlnTT9MvoOYRFi3hoygnztIln56jnpm+skLwzojsZ5uSA0ZrTAPD A9k0WCJYKcIYODZP/yJ92ZqY67uxlagXfooKsu+RVPbdtZeH2ElcWFRjoTowMtEXEs SgLE4mm26P/fg== Message-ID: <3f7cef2a-5ba4-465b-a1f5-77e2bcc50ddb@kernel.org> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 16:38:28 +0900 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Aw: Re: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Power management fixes Content-Language: en-US To: Dieter Mummenschanz , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Niklas Cassel References: <20240111115123.1258422-1-dlemoal@kernel.org> <345be856-8959-4148-bcae-00b3fbcd0d08@kernel.org> From: Damien Le Moal Organization: Western Digital Research In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 1/31/24 16:29, Dieter Mummenschanz wrote: > Damien, > so I've applied the patch to 6.8-rc2. Interesting thing is that the behaviour is > exactly the same as before (w/o the patch). Besides not > honoring CONFIG_SATA_MOBILE_LPM_POLICY=3 after boot my system refuses to > transition into lower power states > pc2 after resume even after letting it sit > idle for 10 minutes. Transition is only reached after issuing hdparm -Y. So if > the patch restores the original behaviour then why did it stop working?! Interesting... hdparm -Y puts the drive to sleep while the revert puts the drive in standby state. Sleep is a near complete shutdown of the drive, while standby is not. In any case, I think something else is causing this. Probably PCI or ACPI related changes. So a bisect would be needed to understand this. But this is going to be very painful to do for this as each test take a while I guess ? How long do you need to wait to see the system going into low power state (when it is working that is) ? Also, which kernel version is the last one you know is OK ? > dmesg: > https://pastes.io/1vmmvhvfub > Regards > Dieter > *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 23. Januar 2024 um 12:52 Uhr > *Von:* "Damien Le Moal" > *An:* "Dieter Mummenschanz" , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org > *Betreff:* Re: Aw: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Power management fixes > On 1/23/24 20:40, Dieter Mummenschanz wrote: > > Damien, > > sorry for getting back to you so late. So is this patch series just a revert or > > is it something new? Can I patch and test against 6.8-rc or should I use 6.7? > > Anyway I need at least a couple of days since I'm very busy ATM. > > Yes, the second patch is essentially a revert. If you can test with 6.8-rc1 it > would be great. > > Thanks. > > -- > Damien Le Moal > Western Digital Research -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research