Re: [PATCH RFC v2] support SATA ODD zero power

Re: [PATCH RFC v2] support SATA ODD zero power

[Tejun Heo]

(cc'ing linux-ide)

Hello,

On 12/08/2010 04:36 PM, Joey Lee wrote:
> Dear all expert, 
> 
> Hi, m... I just google the SATA ODD zero power support and found Henry
> already contribute the patch:
> 
>  http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-scsi/2010/6/25/6885558
> 
> And, after first round review, 
> The second version is here:
>  http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-scsi/msg44925.html
> 
> But, I didn't see this patch merged in kernel maintain, does there have
> any problem with this patch? or actually the patch already in queue
> waiting to merge to mainline?
> 
> I appreciate if can have any comment to me.

IIRC, at the time, the problem was that nobody had the hardware and
the implementation was solely based on the specification only.  I
didn't want it to go in without any actual testing, so it was put on
hold for the time being.  Do you have access to a device with zsero
power support?  If so, are you willing to test the implementation?

Hmmm... at the same time, I'm a little bit doubtful about its
usefulness.  How much power does it save?  Furthermore, ODDs are often
omitted on mobile devices these days.  So, I have a slight reluctance
against including it but if the implementation is clean enough and
there is enough benefits it shouldn't be too difficult to overcome.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

Re: [PATCH RFC v2] support SATA ODD zero power

[Joey Lee]

Hi Tejun, 

Nice can talk with you! :-)

於 三，2010-12-08 於 18:25 +0100，Tejun Heo 提到：
> (cc'ing linux-ide)
> 
> Hello,
> 
> On 12/08/2010 04:36 PM, Joey Lee wrote:
> > Dear all expert, 
> > 
> > Hi, m... I just google the SATA ODD zero power support and found Henry
> > already contribute the patch:
> > 
> >  http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-scsi/2010/6/25/6885558
> > 
> > And, after first round review, 
> > The second version is here:
> >  http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-scsi/msg44925.html
> > 
> > But, I didn't see this patch merged in kernel maintain, does there have
> > any problem with this patch? or actually the patch already in queue
> > waiting to merge to mainline?
> > 
> > I appreciate if can have any comment to me.
> 
> IIRC, at the time, the problem was that nobody had the hardware and
> the implementation was solely based on the specification only.  I
> didn't want it to go in without any actual testing, so it was put on
> hold for the time being.  Do you have access to a device with zsero
> power support?  If so, are you willing to test the implementation?
> 

Got it!
I will do the testing if I get hardware can support this function.

> Hmmm... at the same time, I'm a little bit doubtful about its
> usefulness.  How much power does it save?  Furthermore, ODDs are often

I am not sure how many watts can be save, it's need use 2-channel power
meter or NetDAQ to verify. I know how to do that, just need the sample
machine.

> omitted on mobile devices these days.  So, I have a slight reluctance
> against including it but if the implementation is clean enough and
> there is enough benefits it shouldn't be too difficult to overcome.

Fully understood!


Thank's a lot!
Joey Lee

Re: [PATCH RFC v2] support SATA ODD zero power

[Joey Lee]

Hi Henry, 

於 三，2010-12-08 於 17:56 +0000，joeyli(Joey Lee) 提到：
> Hi Tejun, 
> 
> Nice can talk with you! :-)
> 
> 於 三，2010-12-08 於 18:25 +0100，Tejun Heo 提到：
> > (cc'ing linux-ide)
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > On 12/08/2010 04:36 PM, Joey Lee wrote:
> > > Dear all expert, 
> > > 
> > > Hi, m... I just google the SATA ODD zero power support and found Henry
> > > already contribute the patch:
> > > 
> > >  http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-scsi/2010/6/25/6885558
> > > 
> > > And, after first round review, 
> > > The second version is here:
> > >  http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-scsi/msg44925.html
> > > 
> > > But, I didn't see this patch merged in kernel maintain, does there have
> > > any problem with this patch? or actually the patch already in queue
> > > waiting to merge to mainline?
> > > 
> > > I appreciate if can have any comment to me.
> > 
> > IIRC, at the time, the problem was that nobody had the hardware and
> > the implementation was solely based on the specification only.  I
> > didn't want it to go in without any actual testing, so it was put on
> > hold for the time being.  Do you have access to a device with zsero
> > power support?  If so, are you willing to test the implementation?
> > 
> 
> Got it!
> I will do the testing if I get hardware can support this function.
> 

I received a AMD notebook, there have _PS3 method in DSDT table. After
test, your SATA ODD zero power patch works to me. The /dev/sr0 was
removed when there have no media in tray, patch set ODD power to zero.

But I have a bit questions:

- I suggest add the kernel config check in drivers/scsi/sr.c like the
following, it can avoid compiler error when we disable
BLK_DEV_SR_ZERO_POWER:

+#ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR_ZERO_POWER
+       cd->type = buffer[n + 6] >> 5;
+#endif

> > Hmmm... at the same time, I'm a little bit doubtful about its
> > usefulness.  How much power does it save?  Furthermore, ODDs are often
> 
> I am not sure how many watts can be save, it's need use 2-channel power
> meter or NetDAQ to verify. I know how to do that, just need the sample
> machine.
> 

- After hardware guys test power consumption by 2 channel power-metter,
the patch can save 0.1 - 0.2 W (depend on different ODD hardware) when
ODD power set to zero. This number is not high.

My question is:
What's the different between "ODD Zero power" with "SATA Link Power
Management on ODD"?

(Sorry for I cann't publish more detail power-metter result because it's
from my customer's lab.)

> > omitted on mobile devices these days.  So, I have a slight reluctance
> > against including it but if the implementation is clean enough and
> > there is enough benefits it shouldn't be too difficult to overcome.
> 
> Fully understood!
> 
> 
> Thank's a lot!
> Joey Lee
 
The last question is:

- This Linux patch's behavior is different with Windows platform:
When ODD go to "Zero power" mode, if I want to open tray then I need
press ODD's tray button TWICE: The first time is enable ODD power and
second time for open the tray.
But, on Windows, just need press tray button ONE time, then the tray can
be opened. 

Does it possible modify your patch to enable ODD power then direct open
tray?



Thank's a lot!
Joey Lee

Re: [PATCH RFC v2] support SATA ODD zero power

[Joey Lee]

Hi Henry,

於 三，2010-12-08 於 17:56 +0000，joeyli(Joey Lee) 提到：
> Hi Tejun, 
> 
> Nice can talk with you! :-)
> 
> 於 三，2010-12-08 於 18:25 +0100，Tejun Heo 提到：
> > (cc'ing linux-ide)
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > On 12/08/2010 04:36 PM, Joey Lee wrote:
> > > Dear all expert, 
> > > 
> > > Hi, m... I just google the SATA ODD zero power support and found Henry
> > > already contribute the patch:
> > > 
> > >  http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-scsi/2010/6/25/6885558
> > > 
> > > And, after first round review, 
> > > The second version is here:
> > >  http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-scsi/msg44925.html
> > > 
> > > But, I didn't see this patch merged in kernel maintain, does there have
> > > any problem with this patch? or actually the patch already in queue
> > > waiting to merge to mainline?
> > > 
> > > I appreciate if can have any comment to me.
> > 
> > IIRC, at the time, the problem was that nobody had the hardware and
> > the implementation was solely based on the specification only.  I
> > didn't want it to go in without any actual testing, so it was put on
> > hold for the time being.  Do you have access to a device with zsero
> > power support?  If so, are you willing to test the implementation?
> > 
> 
> Got it!
> I will do the testing if I get hardware can support this function.
> 

I received a AMD notebook, there have _PS3 method in DSDT table. After
test, your SATA ODD zero power patch works to me. The /dev/sr0 was
removed when there have no media in tray, patch set ODD power to zero.

But I have a bit questions:

- I suggest add the kernel config check in drivers/scsi/sr.c like the
following, it can avoid compiler error when we disable
BLK_DEV_SR_ZERO_POWER:

+#ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR_ZERO_POWER
+       cd->type = buffer[n + 6] >> 5;
+#endif


> > Hmmm... at the same time, I'm a little bit doubtful about its
> > usefulness.  How much power does it save?  Furthermore, ODDs are often
> 
> I am not sure how many watts can be save, it's need use 2-channel power
> meter or NetDAQ to verify. I know how to do that, just need the sample
> machine.
> 

- After hardware guys test power consumption by 2 channel power-metter,
the patch can save 0.1 - 0.2 W (depend on different ODD hardware) when
ODD power set to zero. This number is not high.

My question is:
What's the different between "ODD Zero power" with "SATA Link Power
Management on ODD"?

(Sorry for I cann't publish more detail power-metter result because it's
from my customer's lab.)


> > omitted on mobile devices these days.  So, I have a slight reluctance
> > against including it but if the implementation is clean enough and
> > there is enough benefits it shouldn't be too difficult to overcome.
> 
> Fully understood!
> 
> 
> Thank's a lot!
> Joey Lee

The last question is:

- This Linux patch's behavior is different with Windows platform:
When ODD go to "Zero power" mode, if I want to open tray then I need
press ODD's tray button TWICE: The first time is enable ODD power and
second time for open the tray.
But, on Windows, just need press tray button ONE time, then the tray can
be opened. 

Does it possible modify your patch to enable ODD power then direct open
tray?



Thank's a lot!
Joey Lee


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH RFC v2] support SATA ODD zero power

[Joey Lee]

Hi Tejun, 

Sorry bother you for about support SATA ODD zero power in kernel.

Henry didn't reply me. 
Could you please kindly give any comment for this topic?

Looks the SATA ODD zero power didn't have good power reserve number,
does that mean support it in Linux kernel is not worthwhile?


Thank's a lot!
Joey Lee

於 二，2011-02-22 於 10:48 +0000，joeyli(Joey Lee) 提到：
> Hi Henry,
> 
> 於 三，2010-12-08 於 17:56 +0000，joeyli(Joey Lee) 提到：
> > Hi Tejun, 
> > 
> > Nice can talk with you! :-)
> > 
> > 於 三，2010-12-08 於 18:25 +0100，Tejun Heo 提到：
> > > (cc'ing linux-ide)
> > > 
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > On 12/08/2010 04:36 PM, Joey Lee wrote:
> > > > Dear all expert, 
> > > > 
> > > > Hi, m... I just google the SATA ODD zero power support and found Henry
> > > > already contribute the patch:
> > > > 
> > > >  http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-scsi/2010/6/25/6885558
> > > > 
> > > > And, after first round review, 
> > > > The second version is here:
> > > >  http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-scsi/msg44925.html
> > > > 
> > > > But, I didn't see this patch merged in kernel maintain, does there have
> > > > any problem with this patch? or actually the patch already in queue
> > > > waiting to merge to mainline?
> > > > 
> > > > I appreciate if can have any comment to me.
> > > 
> > > IIRC, at the time, the problem was that nobody had the hardware and
> > > the implementation was solely based on the specification only.  I
> > > didn't want it to go in without any actual testing, so it was put on
> > > hold for the time being.  Do you have access to a device with zsero
> > > power support?  If so, are you willing to test the implementation?
> > > 
> > 
> > Got it!
> > I will do the testing if I get hardware can support this function.
> > 
> 
> I received a AMD notebook, there have _PS3 method in DSDT table. After
> test, your SATA ODD zero power patch works to me. The /dev/sr0 was
> removed when there have no media in tray, patch set ODD power to zero.
> 
> But I have a bit questions:
> 
> - I suggest add the kernel config check in drivers/scsi/sr.c like the
> following, it can avoid compiler error when we disable
> BLK_DEV_SR_ZERO_POWER:
> 
> +#ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR_ZERO_POWER
> +       cd->type = buffer[n + 6] >> 5;
> +#endif
> 
> 
> > > Hmmm... at the same time, I'm a little bit doubtful about its
> > > usefulness.  How much power does it save?  Furthermore, ODDs are often
> > 
> > I am not sure how many watts can be save, it's need use 2-channel power
> > meter or NetDAQ to verify. I know how to do that, just need the sample
> > machine.
> > 
> 
> - After hardware guys test power consumption by 2 channel power-metter,
> the patch can save 0.1 - 0.2 W (depend on different ODD hardware) when
> ODD power set to zero. This number is not high.
> 
> My question is:
> What's the different between "ODD Zero power" with "SATA Link Power
> Management on ODD"?
> 
> (Sorry for I cann't publish more detail power-metter result because it's
> from my customer's lab.)
> 
> 
> > > omitted on mobile devices these days.  So, I have a slight reluctance
> > > against including it but if the implementation is clean enough and
> > > there is enough benefits it shouldn't be too difficult to overcome.
> > 
> > Fully understood!
> > 
> > 
> > Thank's a lot!
> > Joey Lee
> 
> The last question is:
> 
> - This Linux patch's behavior is different with Windows platform:
> When ODD go to "Zero power" mode, if I want to open tray then I need
> press ODD's tray button TWICE: The first time is enable ODD power and
> second time for open the tray.
> But, on Windows, just need press tray button ONE time, then the tray can
> be opened. 
> 
> Does it possible modify your patch to enable ODD power then direct open
> tray?
> 
> 
> 
> Thank's a lot!
> Joey Lee
> 

Re: [PATCH RFC v2] support SATA ODD zero power

[Tejun Heo]

Hello,

On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:07:21AM -0600, Joey Lee wrote:
> Sorry bother you for about support SATA ODD zero power in kernel.
> 
> Henry didn't reply me. 
> Could you please kindly give any comment for this topic?
> 
> Looks the SATA ODD zero power didn't have good power reserve number,
> does that mean support it in Linux kernel is not worthwhile?

Well, 0.1-0.2w is not nothing.  It could be meaningful I guess, but
the concern that I have are...

* How wildly is it gonna be deployed?  Most ultraportables don't have
  ODDs to begin with and extra features in ATA land tend to be very
  cumbersome to deploy.  It usually ends up like - half of them
  reporting the supportq incorrectly, quarter of them malfunction when
  enabled and so on.

* Why is software involved in this at all?  The device needs to
  process the eject button to begin with.  I don't really see why ACPI
  or operating system needs to be involved here at all.  What prevents
  ODD from implementing it itself?  Is there any fundamental reason
  why OS should be involved?

  The thing is that if it isn't essential, people aren't gonna
  implement it anyway and we just end up with unused code.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

Re: [PATCH RFC v2] support SATA ODD zero power

[Joey Lee]

Hi Tejun, 

於 一，2011-03-21 於 18:27 +0100，Tejun Heo 提到：
> Hello,
> 
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:07:21AM -0600, Joey Lee wrote:
> > Sorry bother you for about support SATA ODD zero power in kernel.
> > 
> > Henry didn't reply me. 
> > Could you please kindly give any comment for this topic?
> > 
> > Looks the SATA ODD zero power didn't have good power reserve number,
> > does that mean support it in Linux kernel is not worthwhile?
> 
> Well, 0.1-0.2w is not nothing.  It could be meaningful I guess, but
> the concern that I have are...
> 
> * How wildly is it gonna be deployed?  Most ultraportables don't have
>   ODDs to begin with and extra features in ATA land tend to be very
>   cumbersome to deploy.  It usually ends up like - half of them
>   reporting the supportq incorrectly, quarter of them malfunction when
>   enabled and so on.
> 

Per my understood, Intel and AMD's are said they support SATA ODD zero
power on newest notebook platform, and currently still have many
notebook ship with ODD. Intel didn't open their spec for support this
new function.

And, 
Yes, this patch didn't test on ultraportables, especially for if they
try to use USB ODD. For this patch We still need have a lot of test.

> * Why is software involved in this at all?  The device needs to
>   process the eject button to begin with.  I don't really see why ACPI
>   or operating system needs to be involved here at all.  What prevents
>   ODD from implementing it itself?  Is there any fundamental reason
>   why OS should be involved?
> 

I don't know how does Intel implement this function (by EC or ACPI?),
but AMD customized a ACPI object to provide this function. I will find a
chance to use this function on Windows platform, per hardward guys give
me some information, Windows can resume the ODD power from GUI, I will
try to verify it on Windows platform then reply to this mail.

>   The thing is that if it isn't essential, people aren't gonna
>   implement it anyway and we just end up with unused code.
> 
> Thanks.
> 

Yes, this is not a essential feature, just Intel and AMD all said they
support it and some ODM also want to implement. 


Thank's a lot!
Joey Lee

Re: [PATCH RFC v2] support SATA ODD zero power

[Joey Lee]

於 二，2011-03-22 於 07:06 +0000，joeyli(Joey Lee) 提到：
> Hi Tejun, 
> 
> 於 一，2011-03-21 於 18:27 +0100，Tejun Heo 提到：
> > Hello,
> > 
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:07:21AM -0600, Joey Lee wrote:
> > > Sorry bother you for about support SATA ODD zero power in kernel.
> > > 
> > > Henry didn't reply me. 
> > > Could you please kindly give any comment for this topic?
> > > 
> > > Looks the SATA ODD zero power didn't have good power reserve number,
> > > does that mean support it in Linux kernel is not worthwhile?
> > 
> > Well, 0.1-0.2w is not nothing.  It could be meaningful I guess, but
> > the concern that I have are...
> > 
> > * How wildly is it gonna be deployed?  Most ultraportables don't have
> >   ODDs to begin with and extra features in ATA land tend to be very
> >   cumbersome to deploy.  It usually ends up like - half of them
> >   reporting the supportq incorrectly, quarter of them malfunction when
> >   enabled and so on.
> > 
> 
> Per my understood, Intel and AMD's are said they support SATA ODD zero
> power on newest notebook platform, and currently still have many
> notebook ship with ODD. Intel didn't open their spec for support this
> new function.
> 
> And, 
> Yes, this patch didn't test on ultraportables, especially for if they
> try to use USB ODD. For this patch We still need have a lot of test.
> 
> > * Why is software involved in this at all?  The device needs to
> >   process the eject button to begin with.  I don't really see why ACPI
> >   or operating system needs to be involved here at all.  What prevents
> >   ODD from implementing it itself?  Is there any fundamental reason
> >   why OS should be involved?
> > 
> 
> I don't know how does Intel implement this function (by EC or ACPI?),
> but AMD customized a ACPI object to provide this function. I will find a
> chance to use this function on Windows platform, per hardward guys give
> me some information, Windows can resume the ODD power from GUI, I will
> try to verify it on Windows platform then reply to this mail.
> 

More information about the SATA ODD zero power support on Windows
platform from BIOSer. Unfortunately, I still didn't see the REAL windows
system that support SATA ODD zero power.

Per discuss with BIOSer, they said: 
	- The ODD icon still show up when ODD power-off.
		+ Driver turn-off ODD power if there have no disk in tray.
	- End user can power-on ODD by click ODD icon on GUI.
		+ Driver evaluate ACPI method to power-on ODD.
	- Intel and AMD all use ACPI to implement interactive with Windows.

Until now, Intel still didn't open any spec for ODD, as I know, there
also didn't have many shipped notebook support it.


Thank's a lot!
Joey Lee

> >   The thing is that if it isn't essential, people aren't gonna
> >   implement it anyway and we just end up with unused code.
> > 
> > Thanks.
> > 
> 
> Yes, this is not a essential feature, just Intel and AMD all said they
> support it and some ODM also want to implement. 
> 
> 
> Thank's a lot!
> Joey Lee
>