From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"open list:PCI SUBSYSTEM" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/ASPM: Enable L0s/L1 for removable devices when BIOS didn't configure ASPM
Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 16:42:34 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260505214234.GA751157@bhelgaas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <66ceb34e-17a0-4ff5-8534-9067d4e9b32c@amd.com>
[+cc Mika]
On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 11:08:14AM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> On 5/5/26 11:05, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Mon, May 04, 2026 at 05:52:46PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> > > When comparing lspci output between Windows and Linux for hotplugged
> > > Thunderbolt 5 eGPU devices, Windows enables ASPM L1 but Linux doesn't:
> > >
> > > Windows: LnkCtl: ASPM L1 Enabled
> > > Linux: LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled
> > >
> > > This difference in ASPM configuration can cause behavioral differences
> > > between the two operating systems for the same hardware.
> >
> > A tangent, not a comment on the patch itself, but what sort of
> > behavioral differences are these? If ASPM is working correctly, the
> > only differences *should* be in power consumption and performance.
>
> This originally stemmed from a significant performance difference that was
> observed between Windows and Linux with eGPUs. The link in the patch points
> at that bug if you want to look more closely at it.
Hmm. The bug (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=221319)
reports "instant reboot", which is definitely a behavioral difference.
But AFAICS this patch would just fix something noticed along the way
but not the reboot itself.
To avoid confusion, I would use "performance difference" or "power
difference" when describing this patch.
> I was hopeful that aligning ASPM would align the behavior, but alas this
> didn't.
>
> It was still a difference that I figured we should discuss whether it should
> be changed to be consistent.
Definitely. I hope we can at least enable L1.1. L1.2 is a whole
'nother issue.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-05 21:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-04 22:52 [PATCH] PCI/ASPM: Enable L0s/L1 for removable devices when BIOS didn't configure ASPM Mario Limonciello
2026-05-05 16:05 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2026-05-05 16:08 ` Mario Limonciello
2026-05-05 21:42 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2026-05-06 3:36 ` Mario Limonciello
2026-05-05 18:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-05-06 4:53 ` Mika Westerberg
2026-05-06 15:10 ` Mario Limonciello
2026-05-06 15:27 ` Bjorn Helgaas
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=20260505214234.GA751157@bhelgaas \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rafael@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