question about ixgbevf/ixgbevf_main.c

question about ixgbevf/ixgbevf_main.c

[Julia Lawall]

I was wondering why ixgbevf_suspend doesn't call pci_set_power_state?  It
is called in the corresponding resume function, and most other PCI drivers
with a suspend functyion also call it in suspend.

thanks,
julia

Re: question about ixgbevf/ixgbevf_main.c

[Alexander Duyck]

A VF isn't a real device so it shouldn't really have the concept of a
power state.  The power state for the device is controlled via the PF.
I suspect the fact that ixgbevf is modifying power state on resume is
likely a bug.

Thanks,

Alex

On 01/07/2014 06:46 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> I was wondering why ixgbevf_suspend doesn't call pci_set_power_state?  It
> is called in the corresponding resume function, and most other PCI drivers
> with a suspend functyion also call it in suspend.
> 
> thanks,
> julia
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

Re: question about ixgbevf/ixgbevf_main.c

[Julia Lawall]

On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Alexander Duyck wrote:

> A VF isn't a real device so it shouldn't really have the concept of a
> power state.  The power state for the device is controlled via the PF.
> I suspect the fact that ixgbevf is modifying power state on resume is
> likely a bug.

Thanks for the information, which is very helpful.  Should I submit a
patch to remove it in the resume function?  I don't have the ability ot
test it, though.

julia

>
> Thanks,
>
> Alex
>
> On 01/07/2014 06:46 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > I was wondering why ixgbevf_suspend doesn't call pci_set_power_state?  It
> > is called in the corresponding resume function, and most other PCI drivers
> > with a suspend functyion also call it in suspend.
> >
> > thanks,
> > julia
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
>
>

Re: question about ixgbevf/ixgbevf_main.c

[Alexander Duyck]

On 01/07/2014 07:44 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>
>> A VF isn't a real device so it shouldn't really have the concept of a
>> power state.  The power state for the device is controlled via the PF.
>> I suspect the fact that ixgbevf is modifying power state on resume is
>> likely a bug.
> Thanks for the information, which is very helpful.  Should I submit a
> patch to remove it in the resume function?  I don't have the ability ot
> test it, though.
>
> julia
>

You could submit a patch.  The issue should just be cosmetic.  Setting
the power state to D0 should have no impact on things one way or another
since that is the state VFs are normally in when they are created.

Thanks,

Alex