From: Lovekesh Solanki <lovekeshsolanki00@gmail.com>
To: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Michal Pecio <michal.pecio@gmail.com>,
Mathieu Fluhr <mathieu.fluhr@gmail.com>,
Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>,
Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>,
regressions@lists.linux.dev, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xhci: drop 120ms U3 LFPS wake retry wait from runtime resume
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 21:20:01 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <apbrp8EaJoIfEg5X@eggarch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a6a8526f-4b6f-46f7-9d02-05bfe3efcd48@linux.intel.com>
On Tue, Sep 01, 2026 at 03:53:47PM +0300, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> I looked into this again and remember now why we didn't remove the msleep(120)
> earlier.
>
> If we want the hub driver to keep us awake to detect delayed port activity,
> then we need to wake the (root) hub driver in xhci resume.
>
> That means always calling usb_hcd_resume_root_hub() in runtime resume cases where
> resume is caused by usb device remote wake. (xHCI PME# in PCI case), even if there
> isn't any port activity yet.
Got it, thanks for the explanation.
> We don't currently check if runtime resume is caused by xHC PME# wake in the xhci-pci
> driver. Not sure if there's a driver api for it.
> Instead we in resume sleep for 120ms if there exists connected and suspended USB3
> devices without port activity, and then check again.
>
> This msleep(120) is unnecessary if runtime resume was caused by userspace instead
> of usb device initiated wake (seen as PME for PCI hosts)
So the better implementation will cross into the PCI side, are there any
plans to implement that? Or any interest in it at all that you know of?
> Probably best to just take Patch 1/1 and look at this xhci resume part separately.
Do I need to resend the 1/2 Patch independently now that this one is
dropped? Or it'll be taken as is..? I'm still figuring the process out.
Thanks,
Lovekesh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-01 15:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-31 19:03 [PATCH 1/2] usb: hub: use shorter 120ms post resume hold for SS root hubs Lovekesh Solanki
2026-08-31 19:03 ` [PATCH 2/2] xhci: drop 120ms U3 LFPS wake retry wait from runtime resume Lovekesh Solanki
2026-09-01 12:53 ` Mathias Nyman
2026-09-01 15:50 ` Lovekesh Solanki [this message]
2026-09-02 12:10 ` Mathias Nyman
2026-09-02 18:21 ` Lovekesh Solanki
2026-09-03 7:42 ` Mathias Nyman
2026-09-04 13:13 ` Lovekesh Solanki
2026-09-02 13:29 ` [PATCH 1/2] usb: hub: use shorter 120ms post resume hold for SS root hubs Mathias Nyman
2026-09-02 18:43 ` Lovekesh Solanki
2026-09-03 7:50 ` Mathias Nyman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=apbrp8EaJoIfEg5X@eggarch \
--to=lovekeshsolanki00@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
--cc=mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com \
--cc=mathieu.fluhr@gmail.com \
--cc=michal.pecio@gmail.com \
--cc=regressions@leemhuis.info \
--cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox