Re: [BUG] ata: ahci: regression in f7870e8d345c disables DevSleep for ACS-5 drives on PSC=0/SSC=0/SDS=1 controllers

[Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>]

On 2026/04/05 21:01, Patrick Zima wrote:
> Commit f7870e8d345c ("ata: ahci: Disable DIPM if host lacks support") introduced
>   a regression: it disables DIPM — and thereby DevSleep — on drives behind AHCI
>   controllers that have CAP.PSC=0 and CAP.SSC=0 but CAP2.SDS=1 (DevSleep capable).
>   The guard condition is too broad; it treats the absence of Partial/Slumber state
>   bits as grounds to disable DIPM, but DevSleep does not depend on Partial or
>   Slumber being exposed to the OS — only on SDS=1 in CAP2.
> 
>   --- The logic flaw ---
> 
>   The new code (simplified):
> 
>     if (!(cap & HOST_CAP_PART) || !(cap & HOST_CAP_SSC))
>         set ATA_FLAG_NO_DIPM on port
>         → SETFEATURES DISABLE DIPM to all drives with word 78 bit 3 set
> 
>   On a controller with PSC=0, SSC=0 but SDS=1, this fires unconditionally,
>   even though the controller is fully capable of negotiating DevSleep.
>   The flag ATA_FLAG_NO_DIPM then also suppresses ALPM port behaviour at the
>   kernel level — re-enabling DIPM at the drive level via SETFEATURES after the
>   fact does not restore DevSleep.
> 
>   --- Suggested fix ---
> 
>   Gate the DIPM-disable path on the absence of DevSleep support:
> 
>     if (!(cap & HOST_CAP_PART) && !(cap & HOST_CAP_SSC)
>   +     && !(cap2 & HOST_CAP2_SDS)
>         && (ap->flags & ATA_FLAG_DIPM)) {
> 
>   If the controller can do DevSleep (SDS=1), there is no reason to disable
>   DIPM — the power state sequence Active → DevSleep does not require Partial
>   or Slumber to be present.

Instead of sending what looks like an AI generated report, what about you
actually generate a proper patch from the suggested fix and test it ? And send
said patch if the suggested fix works ?


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research