From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5]PCIe native PME support
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 12:58:11 +0100
Message-ID: <20090819115811.GD12216@srcf.ucam.org>
References: <1250666659.23178.119.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1250666659.23178.119.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com>
Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Cc: linux acpi <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, linux-pm <linux-pm@lists.osdl.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 03:24:19PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:

> +static inline void npme_enable_pme(struct pci_dev *pdev, bool enable)
> +{
> +	int pos;
> +	u16 rtctl;
> +
> +	pos = pci_find_capability(pdev, PCI_CAP_ID_EXP);
> +
> +	pci_read_config_word(pdev, pos + PCI_EXP_RTCTL, &rtctl);
> +	if (!enable)
> +		rtctl &= ~PCI_EXP_RTCTL_PMEIE;
> +	else
> +		rtctl |= PCI_EXP_RTCTL_PMEIE;
> +	pci_write_config_word(pdev, pos + PCI_EXP_RTCTL, rtctl);
> +}

This seems to duplicate the existing pci_pme_active() function?

> +static inline void npme_clear_pme(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +{
> +	int pos;
> +	u32 rtsta;
> +
> +	pos = pci_find_capability(pdev, PCI_CAP_ID_EXP);
> +
> +	pci_read_config_dword(pdev, pos + PCI_EXP_RTSTA, &rtsta);
> +	rtsta |= PCI_EXP_RTSTA_PME;
> +	pci_write_config_dword(pdev, pos + PCI_EXP_RTSTA, rtsta);
> +}

Ditto.

> +static bool npme_pme_target(struct pci_dev *target)
> +{
> +	bool ret = false;
> +	if (target->dev.bus->pm && target->dev.bus->pm->wakeup_event)
> +		ret = target->dev.bus->pm->wakeup_event(&target->dev);
> +	return ret;
> +}

Is there any situation in which we wouldn't want to just perform a 
runtime resume of the device here?

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org