From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-oa1-f47.google.com (mail-oa1-f47.google.com [209.85.160.47]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 720D0494806 for ; Fri, 4 Sep 2026 13:13:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.160.47 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788527635; cv=none; b=l5HNElA/sDS2wshMGkbcm5ktqY+GI9+bdqMPhoOrLu163iwE2BS7KlitVDaNL5FwaXTMrm7vEK/9NhrWeIMJo0zTa12OXcenmtYQ8BYWqZAv9x0S7+mrkS1BsSxpTZ7QLvCN5EuVMps2vLC1+eLh0bgOMhCKhZVJkEMHkfXPlvc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788527635; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qeW9HjB/GlkaIQLm8ZbJVD+c0HOdwkjWG+Sfd7Hjcqk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=VaJZM5HwPshate9Wi7ZzlWVyDPChuK2Hdg3GyOlgilScPiuIKop4HbcwnfBZe56VuxWK+YE+7W5mGc9IYjRb1Xbss2qevCbUMYWsKgl3AtodkFI8AI7z8siO1/wpFQk3Hv+DWS+O7Er3PK7c8b6bXarVQsPHHAOm953DLTiJHRc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=opeVrT2Y; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.160.47 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="opeVrT2Y" Received: by mail-oa1-f47.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-46adf49ff3dso641985fac.3 for ; Fri, 04 Sep 2026 06:13:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1788527630; x=1789132430; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=/o90ljmvuQQUSHocuJOX1OqLfyNrCD/R11+CTsvEbww=; b=opeVrT2Yq0jz5RZ57yOZ68H9fSh7LdDNDskFes58bRdtUFhQaVq0iX5kHY4lHci1IR HJW14pYqocavjh1HX6fDC40ymxS7Qv46Fx67pDsBL4c6GuAgHqT8Rpxfmh+4xCA1y1yV NDQFHI54gZdOrM07kE2g75FwuJhZ2eVTJP72onb1vUq0Yfo1E0A8J5J1O9pmCL35h8Qa lt0e6MM2IJ6ft1y26NbziswGCIGywD54YRi+UsSTy6OclcGyDFv+eGAIwt4Ps7864ekF /OMCA99hxjsvoQZGiFcDXxafQOnvglOU9gBZP3MSBhuhkzVAJyU8NgTwkrAs7liYp3G6 sKOw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1788527630; x=1789132430; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=/o90ljmvuQQUSHocuJOX1OqLfyNrCD/R11+CTsvEbww=; b=In3KwBNaxpELz4PMVqLaoCtA8QuMwTHRPz4RNsSGUt8gO/1g6/TkFItXBFZ0cNuNNj Hdo8HHQuT5iw6DaXPUly79VpsQHrW/Y2u0h/nTv+gJ98tQP2vdpIKRpMuzQVYo+BOC4R 9Hgh+DT7lbzhkWLdVdels64gZAeH7B1GxfUvfFECygmujv/niVWX59GCRgZZP94iK5j4 Kv+ap+wAFrOWysFysq5ohLyjglBWoBzHxyhWIoxa9NctNEaUadyGUV3I2fRL35Wz2TPq d+c8cT4tehFOV+w+KXDB8yNq85oTjLfoBeLhDvvDvgl/8c9JTi9in7EslOVSF/7Lx5PV NnSg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvBwOOf2/s/B1Xarah405QxDp9RR1KRSbJcrqcS6GVwqNFiv24uQ2okTn1tqPFsj2Lemfeqyv9/z02XgeSw==@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++mNL/OQfgrYCZMjmOLLRIPJ0p1tDJypXJoxVMZuDxqlh/RmHzuu Bf2cdDiuJnYVfzV6hmh2LtU3VbygL6ZsBfGzzbFWs1bk8o8ITjNC0+ho X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou2yCeA/UQXFJqFCEdPEwcqz6Q8+27Wo3Uqav1f8MJfa45DOVDzalmMZyIMm1Iv WcRB3VQbJYMFOUS3EzYYOx6DYFxToU6sT47IzxfPuNA+X3PsQu93RN4W3Qb5HTWlprBSCZDwIh6 P5ysjIeyQNH8OJG53sOwZVSI2QhiJKq+CrPM/NRqOR0ziBHveppVEEipSJNT7JS+/8cSczdh9FY 1uKyR5piq+iB0fFSquh9SpEx3Xw75gSnViDlQ71aIj2F/XCLzv4TAYq4aB+TwGkkXScpDGBEYH2 1cNfAgI7yMaNU9lnu/JuOb24JmspMylm5XYeiNKGc9pZjomLSM2PvbHN8eNEC//mAaH/niqTHf6 4HHXqkgt/Q46IyEzTDLLsBHQHZcuAq2VWygpaOV7tTM2/70TUum9wsJKdJ42N77OOhhGZMfLFZb rXjrlS5lCTllnrejWfLjGpFF10dGgPLBPtBHrNMbbmnHPoN7b+4cQAjipk2Ji9OhXa0/Lun9wgh iGHr0haM/FpIL2XiHbW7qWp0j3Bjg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6820:162b:b0:6b7:46fc:1cf with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-6b746fc2ed1mr2604016eaf.46.1788527629952; Fri, 04 Sep 2026 06:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2409:40c4:180:9098:c5e4:83d7:dd06:4e15]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5a478bee46e88-3339ac24d7esm10301543eec.15.2026.09.04.06.13.47 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 04 Sep 2026 06:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2026 18:43:43 +0530 From: Lovekesh Solanki To: Mathias Nyman Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michal Pecio , Mathieu Fluhr , Mario Limonciello , Thorsten Leemhuis , regressions@lists.linux.dev, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xhci: drop 120ms U3 LFPS wake retry wait from runtime resume Message-ID: References: <20260831190349.29590-1-lovekeshsolanki00@gmail.com> <20260831190349.29590-2-lovekeshsolanki00@gmail.com> <1be8e57f-9abe-4b34-bc09-e7934a2fa1bc@linux.intel.com> <082467bf-d045-45d7-b097-97a5790e79d6@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: regressions@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <082467bf-d045-45d7-b097-97a5790e79d6@linux.intel.com> On Thu, Sep 03, 2026 at 10:42:48AM +0300, Mathias Nyman wrote: > On 9/2/26 21:21, Lovekesh Solanki wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 02, 2026 at 03:10:41PM +0300, Mathias Nyman wrote: > > > It's possible PCI side or pm core already provides some easy way for xhci driver to check this. > > > This specific issue is currently not on my todo list, yet. > > Alright, would you like to me to work on this? I could look into > > that side and possibly come up with an approach. > > Yes, please, that would be great. I took a look at the PCI / PM side, and it seems to me there isn't any reliable approach for xhci driver to use right now. The pci_check_pme_status() both checks and clears the pme status bit and the pci core devours it inside pci_pme_wakeup(), and pm_request_resume is async so xhci's runtime_resume may run much later after the bit is already gone. We can't simply export pci_check_pme_status() that wouldn't give any useful info. One solution I can think of would be adding a pme_wake_detected bitfield on pci_dev struct, we set it in pci_pme_wakeup() when PME is confirmed and we clear it in pci_pm_runtime_resume() after the driver has returned. Then, we could directly read via pdev->pme_wake_detected in its own resume. What are your thoughts on this? Regards, Lovekesh