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 2CEB418FDC8; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 10:29:39 +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=1737368980; cv=none; b=jsFCy/BaT52dhiKk5LNG4S2kIPpouk40GZpB+gtYqmpWk2epbbw91JiLRyEfERmMxMdVYc8F3bG/WzEF9u8At+mCieUYgPweSFf2RytssYTgpELEAgkO/L+8EjV/8HPGIhpsZNoLd8D54Hl0g2RX/Rq7+hs3ANcO2QU/r/99exc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737368980; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5+KuJyvD0Cc+bCHcr9Ef9KT8l8mKwIGskoiH678TfHk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=fHyXlH/KSuOcECN/M+mqC/38DpzmwhOd+jIDNv8R/HFu4XYDaNlm48Z8p5kOkREwkDqFlGiKsFUo2UMGCgnTmlXePBawdwscdX3SAZOq3MrfzUY3QNY4EwuS3gNau4XlCHofv5QdgWTT3fys22NLa8yGZERJVoblFCBhgvy6lTc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Hro/JAcX; 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="Hro/JAcX" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7A9DEC4CEDD; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 10:29:39 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1737368979; bh=5+KuJyvD0Cc+bCHcr9Ef9KT8l8mKwIGskoiH678TfHk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Hro/JAcXZ0b8TgiIvv+8tEIDQEE9Kqgy3/W9FyrH5TnLwxwaJMuWLvi9hOmvTZ4qQ /qaBoN75okTuDGxiGXKZx71yuoiAWJIjU/7Y8t/ttucGzfRgwIXJ2oLSpqP0d1b5ey QmME3Bz1fnM2HoufpTuX9CWGyGJfPyWas+ocqRDhhGmEfvBDbWbgjXaMplEwPrOOl0 s0NbNrF9cCyLCZJ0pR/Ee8RqwEiB1W7Phh+1AAAfu9WXM6Nwwkdui78X5yhOkxHJX/ RBvjIIQM4qPcl6baRqV01CfqTzv0ZF06q2N+0jSoMN5GhxdZMBuWQrtu/7sHOd2Cjx uhP1tE4xnMvJg== Received: from johan by xi.lan with local (Exim 4.97.1) (envelope-from ) id 1tZp2L-000000007D4-39CR; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 11:29:42 +0100 Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2025 11:29:41 +0100 From: Johan Hovold To: Manivannan Sadhasivam , Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Krishna Chaitanya Chundru , rafael@kernel.org, ulf.hansson@linaro.org, Kevin Xie , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Krzysztof =?utf-8?Q?Wilczy=C5=84ski?= , Rob Herring , Bjorn Helgaas , Markus.Elfring@web.de, quic_mrana@quicinc.com, m.szyprowski@samsung.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, regressions@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] PCI: Enable runtime pm of the host bridge Message-ID: References: <20250113162549.a2y7dlwnsfetryyw@thinkpad> <20250114211653.GA487608@bhelgaas> <20250119152940.6yum3xnrvqx2xjme@thinkpad> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@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: <20250119152940.6yum3xnrvqx2xjme@thinkpad> On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 08:59:40PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 03:16:53PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 09:55:49PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 07, 2025 at 03:27:59PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote: > > > > > > I just noticed that this change in 6.13-rc1 is causing the > > > > > > following warning on resume from suspend on machines like the > > > > > > Lenovo ThinkPad X13s: > > > > > > pci0004:00: pcie4: Enabling runtime PM for inactive device with active children > > > > > > which may have unpopulated ports (this laptop SKU does not > > > > > > have a modem). > > What's the plan for this? Does anybody have a proposal? > > > > TBH, I don't know how to fix this issue in a proper way. I need inputs from > Rafael/Ulf. > > > IIUC there is no functional issue, but the new warning must be fixed, > > and it would sure be nice to do it before v6.13. If there *is* a > > functional problem, we need to consider a revert ASAP. > > > > There is no functional problem that I'm aware of, so revert is not warranted. I'd argue for reverting the offending commit as that is the only way to make sure that the new warning is ever addressed. Vendors unfortunately do not a have a good track record of following up and fixing issues like this. Judging from a quick look at the code (and the commit message of the patch in question), no host controller driver depends on the commit in question as the ones that do enable runtime PM just resume unconditionally at probe() currently (i.e. effectively ignores the state of their children). Johan