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 732E21B043E; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 17:09:31 +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=1742231371; cv=none; b=GGMl6dNMhxqK5A3T9uM7tdYszqgilorY0SaAqzcy4n3Oh8u0n1u71ISmuU44N9jl5IOWP/4FzAKU+YNdD0iO5FW0Q8z1GIxmGg/1csvwPWXEkEDrvRpKuRxR6TszqW3UHCO4fRTxC3JKqs7V89gO8E6205gLaXwumls2dI8/3jg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1742231371; c=relaxed/simple; bh=lzjEQyNrFqiofrWTqg+HjMoyqD6I8IOLRgBp+2jTyso=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=mOooJX9e0Uf0erpsOAj0oXygfHTe7Ygwf+INcK2LrFRljJMrCzowgt2QbKpJXrxwSkOZhao9kfDYIxBbutdPU3pKTf6q+eTk3wOVgaLwMJ63Abk+kEJ4FfPNyGoZxAi8H6fJT4G0mqTJKo7rnpxfviki0xobBWIEz1D+xDy0AVg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=mp+fV+xw; 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="mp+fV+xw" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 533C6C4CEE3; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 17:09:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1742231371; bh=lzjEQyNrFqiofrWTqg+HjMoyqD6I8IOLRgBp+2jTyso=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=mp+fV+xwdhZK133qDYGAH1lJlcZeYqEEBOP+TIvxjYbWscyk/SlTbprSzzi7hmflZ soF/DaOzY2fCUZ7OmqJfKIYl1RXgJ8XgXpsA8mxbVKy9NOJEfvHIOJD4fhP33pJC08 clGMyJL7JjazS3XASZLN3UPbcZTlgfpTdDvDa77vFE7PRtYBiCpHuiuyTTtoEIxqKg ZojCv6GsSZyI58NWpn+0/0edmGbDcU1pBUyws2a2NLvH0j0mCPlfszPLNIMTJ2tuR3 hsEHn5CmXe2bXpgYgbeGfkypWGx85rkwDKqU8AtVMILPJLvdFoW6gySFBAxa7n28Jg WyFBDArppcahA== Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 18:09:25 +0100 From: Niklas Cassel To: Hans de Goede Cc: Eric , Salvatore Bonaccorso , Mario Limonciello , Christoph Hellwig , Mika Westerberg , Damien Le Moal , Jian-Hong Pan , regressions@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Dieter Mummenschanz Subject: Re: Regression from 7627a0edef54 ("ata: ahci: Drop low power policy board type") on reboot (but not cold boot) Message-ID: References: <9c4a635a-ce9f-4ed9-9605-002947490c61@redhat.com> <383d5740-7740-4051-b39a-b8c74b035ec2@redhat.com> <9ac6e1ab-f2af-4bff-9d50-24df68ca1bb9@redhat.com> <6d125c69-35b2-45b5-9790-33f3ea06f171@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6d125c69-35b2-45b5-9790-33f3ea06f171@redhat.com> Hello Hans, On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 07:47:11PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 13-Mar-25 4:28 PM, Niklas Cassel wrote: > > Hello Hans, > > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 04:13:24PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>> > >>> Considering that DIPM seems to work fine on the Maxtor drive, I guess your > >>> initial suggestion of a Samsung only quirk which only disables LPM on ATI > >>> is the best way? > >> > >> I have no objections against going that route, except that I guess this > >> should then be something like ATA_QUIRK_NO_DIPM_ON_ATI to not loose the > >> other LPM modes / savings? AFAIK/IIRC there still is quite some powersaving > >> to be had without DIPM. > > > > I was thinking like your original suggestion, i.e. setting: > > ATA_QUIRK_NO_LPM_ON_ATI > > > > for all the Samsung devices that currently have: > > ATA_QUIRK_NO_NCQ_ON_ATI > > > > Considering that this Samsung device only supports DIPM > > (and not HIPM), I'm guessing the same is true for the other > > Samsung devices as well. > > Ah I see ... > > > So we might as well just do: > > ATA_QUIRK_NO_LPM_ON_ATI > > Yes I agree and that will nicely work as a combination of > ATA_QUIRK_NO_LPM + ATA_QUIRK_NO_NCQ_ON_ATI functionality > so using tested code-paths in a slightly new way. I sent a patch that implements your original suggestion here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ide/20250317170348.1748671-2-cassel@kernel.org/ I forgot to add your Suggested-by tag. If the patch solves Eric's problem, I could add the tag when applying. Kind regards, Niklas