From: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: Ocean HY1 He <hehy1@lenovo.com>,
"bhelgaas@google.com" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"wangyijing@huawei.com" <wangyijing@huawei.com>,
"luto@kernel.org" <luto@kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"prarit@redhat.com" <prarit@redhat.com>,
"jcm@redhat.com" <jcm@redhat.com>,
Nagananda Chumbalkar <nchumbalkar@lenovo.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/ASPM: fix reverse ASPM L0s assignment of upstream and downstream
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 14:19:01 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5745EC95.1020506@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160525175039.GC3208@localhost>
On 5/25/2016 1:50 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> > You are saying that it is OK to enable L0s on just one side of the
>> > link as long as both sides support L0s.
> I'm not sure what you mean by the link parameters not being
> compatible, but I think it is legal to enable L0s on only one
> direction.
I'm talking about L0s acceptable and entry latency times used to
determine when L0s can be enabled.
>
>> > This part is a little bit misleading. I had HW people telling me
>> > that both sides need to enable L0s at about the same time.
> I don't remember seeing anything like that in the spec. Do they have
> a pointer? "At about the same time" is too hand-wavey to be useful to
> software.
>
OK. Let me do some more push back. I wanted to understand the OS
behavior and its reasoning.
Your answers are sufficient.
--
Sinan Kaya
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-25 18:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-24 6:29 [PATCH] PCI/ASPM: fix reverse ASPM L0s assignment of upstream and downstream Ocean HY1 He
2016-05-24 11:53 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-05-24 14:42 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-05-25 16:36 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-05-25 12:58 ` Ocean HY1 He
2016-05-25 16:57 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-05-25 17:21 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-05-25 17:50 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-05-25 18:19 ` Sinan Kaya [this message]
2016-05-25 18:33 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-05-25 20:44 ` Sinan Kaya
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=5745EC95.1020506@codeaurora.org \
--to=okaya@codeaurora.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=hehy1@lenovo.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=jcm@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=nchumbalkar@lenovo.com \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=wangyijing@huawei.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