Re: [PATCH v4] PCI: Prevent power state transition of erroneous device

[Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>]

On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 07:49:26PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 7:23 PM Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 05:23:10PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 1:27 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 10:54 AM Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 01:56:28PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> > > > > > On 5/20/2025 1:42 PM, Raag Jadav wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 12:39:12PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:

...

> > > > > > From the driver perspective it does have expectations that the parts outside
> > > > > > the driver did the right thing.  If the driver was expecting the root port
> > > > > > to be powered down at suspend and it wasn't there are hardware components
> > > > > > that didn't power cycle and that's what we're seeing here.
> > > > >
> > > > > Which means the expectation set by the driver is the opposite of the
> > > > > purpose of this patch, and it's going to fail if any kind of error is
> > > > > detected under root port during suspend.
> > > >
> > > > And IMV this driver's expectation is questionable at least.
> > > >
> > > > There is no promise whatsoever that the device will always be put into
> > > > D3cold during system suspend.
> > >
> > > For instance, user space may disable D3cold for any PCI device via the
> > > d3cold_allowed attribute in sysfs.
> > >
> > > If the driver cannot handle this, it needs to be fixed.
> >
> > Thanks for confirming. So should we consider this patch to be valid
> > and worth moving forward?
> 
> It doesn't do anything that would be invalid in principle IMV.
> 
> You need to consider one more thing, though: It may be necessary to
> power-cycle the device in order to kick it out of the erroneous state
> and the patch effectively blocks this if I'm not mistaken.
> 
> But admittedly I'm not sure if this really matters.

Wouldn't something like bus reset (SBR) be more predictable?

Raag