Received: by 10.223.185.116 with SMTP id b49csp443081wrg; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 01:58:30 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x227Yo3s/dICM1UYCtWlHO/yDzUCwHEopG+DTLD95oISOUfkdEwWeYC+ulhlfNWvumtn3RRJv X-Received: by 10.98.216.137 with SMTP id e131mr17229490pfg.17.1519120710677; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 01:58:30 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1519120710; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=NyWp8e4GJTfnFdcA9ioujM/ACMIjmRDU3vj1SNjM7dOmnUvUkQ9eQ0VBCEOGpw4dCP X8KClyTl/e0MY/ZRFxSrFkwgau1pN7nvOvgZvj55M4UI83LMAPNZo/1O1+5gTMCsajTy v/3qp8MeJ07lmFdzteYdJ3DTgetmTycdgApIN/SlDnuC/JogYvyA1cVSa+P/qFl/8u9G XYfXJdZtznYcLh4Y4ZsJoF97m9I5lIt11SS7fMKqnXP5298VtzbU8nce49UBC4acNR90 jYnZxyboPnOhjjWM9/YswJg/HUF6CPnftccjMvB+TYpEKYDUDG9dpnbaF60kOmqlm+pw MnrQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :references:in-reply-to:mime-version:dkim-signature :arc-authentication-results; bh=AJ1isu7Dhg7VTybvrfS6VLDa6Vy4KFB2TmS61XOrsqo=; b=YYwQhoQQDcUD3hrhpaUT3cpuYNZqTiS+HHzfmlXVl3oOtAT2ImiSqGU7QljwWbZdTV kXySq8Sbx6YLw4Ead8rSwxGyGnsWzP3eIcgs0jWRpdgF9bs5aQZOZrCk0Lgjw9ZxEIJd DXH+rz33QcGoV5YDL4FmJZvd2PqB1pmpkDLv1Kmd8x3/O1mXLG8C32qAW/YGGnWWqUuq YZAYBFxYHaWnSXZoNeWfhoORURleYRIiqifWMWsxsMPQZANc1XJtt80bmAZdSSyyt5Ok QDW48uGucADQucY60zHjy4SXn+JJkRFJWr7ug96BWZbCwlp952fGK2VaJoMbaqk9mITH gu4Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=gFiRZtJg; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id b6si4331316pgr.640.2018.02.20.01.58.15; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 01:58:30 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=gFiRZtJg; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751340AbeBTJ5L (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 20 Feb 2018 04:57:11 -0500 Received: from mail-ot0-f194.google.com ([74.125.82.194]:35692 "EHLO mail-ot0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750979AbeBTJ5I (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Feb 2018 04:57:08 -0500 Received: by mail-ot0-f194.google.com with SMTP id p8so8065651otf.2; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 01:57:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=AJ1isu7Dhg7VTybvrfS6VLDa6Vy4KFB2TmS61XOrsqo=; b=gFiRZtJgIpTRHQ/92c/SGHVSvBK0FuT1jznyA9F9IrgGw6WhWPp7a4u/hfuLoUsWGt lB8b6eQJnEBkoAAU1u1agcaTbyuICJbXYxoUw3PgngS3QO+BWUyuvD/8q6wjhdLq1+44 3UKh8HPVHTel2dA5KB3JNS6jQ6fadx6G+Q2xW6i7TZsZhcyXu4PBS2v5ixSW+xLqCMFk jiFjloZlodyjq5Q2NoQGWNk6aYeB/dVUzP9BebrskUtHB7WC0P2fIkXg8LMJoOZ6zK3i hXmHhZIMoDe3eZLg9XcNlOqCP/cNfN+JViP3Detnrjb0VIr08N1OiQDRejw0NzcynZVC 75Qw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=AJ1isu7Dhg7VTybvrfS6VLDa6Vy4KFB2TmS61XOrsqo=; b=YegKBOOwqPNrCM+Cl0yd69mN747gnWUzKMYzXm40YMFiSzUVmk1nIhcI/h4M8IbZU/ pR+iTGMlyDM9ThfKiXDkdl5sWaUIRs8QMmAR3YBiWpl5Bv9X2ZMTqFjGCkGb2Tgxd/4M OkGcAW0r9GKqx9FKhzh1LGBWVl/gO2MftvyMPUd3AX0Znn8J5GGSMg/27SDv3QKVCWH4 EARR3R01bf1d6jbpCAXkeFKcfk2c66A6VHYYWR1XUeWFfPdfI8sMeslDneIbKQWTrPuw Epk99WiJO8qYrXy+0N3nDdXaYEnYMTrB9O94lAtlGj2j5+mQIcx6I1zDk+FdJA5Rv+Zl kVOA== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPBb/l7dVoQUjIwRqtAZrSqvqyJGl4QU9ih4TnCvgBSOp2B/PmXN vPosXXuI/R3H7eC204k2EbWOgLYzpZiu+ffNtD4= X-Received: by 10.157.40.101 with SMTP id h34mr4282204otd.364.1519120627734; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 01:57:07 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.157.44.146 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 01:57:07 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <151908155159.37696.9710083237704994886.stgit@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> <151908204614.37696.12828004282495415825.stgit@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 10:57:07 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Xkn_xF595vSKc4L1nqa3ANyrv6A Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] PCI: Allow user to request power management of conventional and hotplug bridges To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Linux PCI , Valdis Kletnieks , Mathias Nyman , Linux PM , Mika Westerberg , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Lukas Wunner , Peter Wu , Qipeng Zha , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Andreas Noever , Dave Airlie , Qi Zheng Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 12:14 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >> From: Bjorn Helgaas >> >> Previously "pcie_port_pm=force" enabled power management of PCI bridges, >> but only for PCIe ports (not conventional PCI bridges) and only for ports >> that do not support hotplug. Those limitations are there because we're not >> confident that all those configurations work, not because the spec requires >> them. >> >> Change "pcie_port_pm=force" to enable power management of conventional PCI >> bridges and hotplug bridges as well as PCIe ports. As with the previous >> PCIe port-only behavior, this is not expected to work in all systems. >> >> Add a "pci=bridge_pm" parameter to reflect the increased scope. For >> backward compatibility, retain "pcie_port_pm=force" as an undocumented >> equivalent. >> >> Add "pci=no_bridge_pm" as an equivalent to "pcie_port_pm=off". This >> disables power management for all PCI bridges, which is results in the same >> behavior as before, since we always disabled power management of >> conventional PCI bridges, and "pcie_port_pm=off" disabled it for PCIe >> ports. >> >> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas > > Honestly, I wouldn't do that, at least not this way. > > Somebody might be using pcie_port_pm=force already, for example, and > it works for them for PCIe, but the PCI-to-PCI part of the same system > may not. > > IMO the behavior of pcie_port_pm= should be as is and I don't see > what's wrong with it being documented. That said it may be useful to add something like this to the documentation of it in kernel-parameters.txt: [PCIe port power management is needed to enable SoC-wide power management on some SoCs shipping since 2015, so it is enabled by default on systems from 2015 and newer. Some older systems may still benefit from it and it may not work on some newer systems due to hardware problems. Use this parameter in those cases.]