From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 A022733065D for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2026 16:18:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789402723; cv=none; b=Ic0QUwNAaipliIlsseqv25ILwu5YyVxWfQiERRF1in7FJZA89+4u3cqqSlgVdiczSFn1D6qUlWUa+SKnSJoHHjlmQS34yOJQnztQM7Rsl1MJ8u4ZWmr5k5TC2GLFn6aS31K1jrX7RjRImSq0ExjTDPvCxKqHGFxfLjGYLLniU8Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789402723; c=relaxed/simple; bh=eHNWRQ6svDTop1BTauX2207+aIgriqU/sX9gr3Z9X/E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Disposition; b=LFKLpVfQUPHsYHtaauybBMenBZ7vB/VVK6QHp/qQG+txf/ShnRQeMqSWga9JSyW8b9wU3/sqUgHcpYOccOCRTnmB43OBnvxnuUre07jF9lZvRjh8+UKM6GPTSq3bvwinSlLAY9s7LVSQso+F+zMd4Kt+MStilLnDc8UJdSUbQd0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=lq1cySug; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="lq1cySug" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 274071F000FF; Mon, 14 Sep 2026 16:18:39 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1789402721; bh=SE+8Jej7Oq6lvORv2EPNeTRwao4RbqZ2kQB7sF2CmMo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject; b=lq1cySug3PXG14UrJP8Qf6eau4YixyR88kMiumskbz/WDVgY4wb63svliEcWRD+2s PnDz8+a4OMiSGOE2Jn9a6cCisF5LVFte07oOBHJ3jeK9gRN4wZMw3VLGLufjK0awnZ fXT75tcfQzGbU+Gs5dNlV6vldT6a0yV0NRAmDMjCKUGq5RuBT8rR9x1oYIoABOmEuZ dojVLrltajFXd3adQddFS94+wvFavvHTBdWwyfiaJBbRnaei/4m3F6P448BcsdPjG5 pUNo9Nuy+1Stfr1xvlRY2F6jWIMOFO+1Gc8jMzUBMao3mEOmIvS9tAqHODgyy23OlP xk0KOXKZmVBbA== Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 18:18:37 +0200 From: Niklas Cassel To: Mario Limonciello Cc: grandmastertriplej@gmail.com, Damien Le Moal , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Subject: AMD AHCI + Samsung 870 QVO STANDBY IMMEDIATE time out Message-ID: 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 Hello Mario, Perhaps you, or someone at AMD could help us with this: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=221986 Is seems that a user is having issues with: 12:00.0 SATA controller [0106]: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD] 600 Series Chipset SATA Controller [1022:43f6] (rev 01) together with: Samsung SSD 870 QVO 8TB when being issued command STANDBY IMMEDIATE (E0h) during system suspend. The command never receives a completion. It seems that this is only a problem when "med_power_with_dipm" is enabled. Apparently, when using "max_performance" the drives do complete the STANDBY IMMEDIATE (E0h) command successfully. >From looking at the AHCI specification, the HBA should automatically wake the drive when a new command is issued via PxCI. The user did point out that these Samsung drives are quirked with: ATA_QUIRK_NO_LPM_ON_ATI. See commit: f2aac4c73c99 ("ata: libata-core: Add ATA_QUIRK_NO_LPM_ON_ATI for certain Samsung SSDs"). >From earlier reports, these Samsung drives appear to handle LPM perfectly fine on Intel-based AHCI controllers. This LPM quirk is only for the old ATI AHCI controllers, because it was assumed that, just like the ATI specific quirk that disables NCQ: ATA_QUIRK_NO_NCQ_ON_ATI, that the AMD AHCI controllers were unaffected, see e.g. 7a8526a5cd51 ("libata: Add ATA_HORKAGE_NO_NCQ_ON_ATI for Samsung 860 and 870 SSD."): After verifying the chipset from the user reports, the issue appears on AMD/ATI SB7x0/SB8x0/SB9x0 SATA Controllers and does not appear on recent AMD SATA adapters. I guess it is possible that while the AMD AHCI controllers have fixed the NCQ problem with Samsung SSDs (that was troubling ATI AHCI), perhaps the AMD AHCI controllers still have the LPM issues with Samsung SSDS that was troubling ATI AHCI controllers. It this anything anyone at AMD is aware of? >From the users report, he is using the latest available firmware from Samsung. Considering that Samsung SSD work fine with LPM on Intel, I'm considering the users suggestion, to simply rename the ATA_QUIRK_NO_LPM_ON_ATI to ATA_QUIRK_NO_LPM_ON_ATI_AND_AMD and modify the quirk to extend to AMD AHCI controllers as well. Kind regards, Niklas