public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
To: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Iain Lane <iain@orangesquash.org.uk>,
	Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan 
	<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] PCI: Don't put non-power manageable PCIe root ports into D3
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2023 08:26:01 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230802052601.GM14638@black.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d1b2cf1b-de5f-6c2e-c8dc-fdf60cd0882d@amd.com>

Hi Mario,

On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 10:17:11PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> > Consequently, platform_pci_bridge_d3() will return false and the only
> > thing that may allow the port to go into D0 is the dmi_get_bios_year()
> > check at the end of pci_bridge_d3_possible().
> > 
> > However, that was added, because there are Intel platforms on which
> > Root Ports need to be programmed into D3hot on suspend (which allows
> > the whole platform to reduce power significantly) and there are no
> > ACPI device power management objects associated with them (Mika should
> > know the gory details related to this).  It looks like under Windows
> > the additional power reduction would not be possible on those systems,
> > but that would be a problem, wouldn't it?
> > 
> 
> I've been thinking on this today, and I at least have a hypothesis about
> this behavior.  Perhaps Windows is actually utilizing enabled PEP
> constraints to enforce what state device should be put into over Modern
> Standby cycles in the absence of ACPI objects.
> 
> In the case of one of my problematic system the PEP constraints for the root
> port are:
> 
> Package (0x04)
> {
> 	0x00,
> 	"\\_SB.PCI0.GP17",
> 	0x00,
> 	0x00
> },
> 
> That first 0x00 means the constraint isn't actually enabled for the root
> port.
> 
> Mika,
> 
> Could you get an acpidump from one of these problematic Intel systems so we
> can check the PEP constraints to see if this theory works? Or maybe you have
> some other ideas why this is different?

The patch adding this was merged in 2016 and unfortunately I don't have
any of the ACPI dumps from them available anymore (and do not recall the
details either). I think these were Apollo Lake-P based systems with the
initial runtime D3cold and S0ix support at the time.

  reply	other threads:[~2023-08-02  5:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-07-11  0:53 [PATCH v7 0/2] Fix wakeup problems on some AMD platforms Mario Limonciello
2023-07-11  0:53 ` [PATCH v7 1/2] PCI: Refactor pci_bridge_d3_possible() Mario Limonciello
2023-07-11  0:53 ` [PATCH v7 2/2] PCI: Don't put non-power manageable PCIe root ports into D3 Mario Limonciello
2023-07-11 22:14   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-07-11 22:54     ` Mario Limonciello
2023-07-12 12:13       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-07-12 16:09         ` Limonciello, Mario
2023-07-14 19:17           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-07-15  0:46             ` Limonciello, Mario
2023-08-01  3:25               ` Mario Limonciello
2023-08-01 10:15                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-08-02  3:17                   ` Mario Limonciello
2023-08-02  5:26                     ` Mika Westerberg [this message]
2023-08-02 14:10                       ` Mario Limonciello
2023-08-02 14:31                         ` Mika Westerberg
2023-08-02 14:35                           ` Mario Limonciello
2023-08-02 15:00                             ` Mika Westerberg
     [not found]             ` <67fa2dda-f383-1864-57b8-08b86263bd02@amd.com>
2023-08-01  9:54               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-07-12 11:48     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-07-12 15:23       ` Andy Shevchenko

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=20230802052601.GM14638@black.fi.intel.com \
    --to=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=iain@orangesquash.org.uk \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \
    /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