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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1f67f00a-8141-f9af-2120-c78f7cfecb1d@canonical.com>
References: <56a8953c-d833-837c-57d5-fe758d4db02a@canonical.com>
 <CAJZ5v0j8GAatWoAra37y3c-ti2Ft5am75KONgEkjB6AaypkCqg@mail.gmail.com>
 <ae84e595-dede-1409-4aff-3a29a310f2ba@canonical.com> <CAJZ5v0gapMMf=KqBAoDTv0SUBeusrUFPyEz6Z4k8Y3Szizdm5Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <1f67f00a-8141-f9af-2120-c78f7cfecb1d@canonical.com>
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 1 May 2018 10:34:29 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0iPsoxCLxsq156RvyZ1cWtM9jNMLUPMnE3cqi5r1jk8jg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Regression] PCI / PM: Simplify device wakeup settings code
To:     Joseph Salisbury <joseph.salisbury@canonical.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        1745646@bugs.launchpad.net,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 4:22 PM, Joseph Salisbury
<joseph.salisbury@canonical.com> wrote:
> On 04/16/2018 11:58 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 5:31 PM, Joseph Salisbury
>> <joseph.salisbury@canonical.com> wrote:
>>> On 04/13/2018 05:34 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 7:56 PM, Joseph Salisbury
>>>> <joseph.salisbury@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Rafael,
>>>>>
>>>>> A kernel bug report was opened against Ubuntu [0].  After a kernel
>>>>> bisect, it was found that reverting the following two commits resolved
>>>>> this bug:
>>>>>
>>>>> 0ce3fcaff929 ("PCI / PM: Restore PME Enable after config space restoration")
>>>>> 0847684cfc5f("PCI / PM: Simplify device wakeup settings code")
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a regression introduced in v4.13-rc1 and still exists in
>>>>> mainline.  The bug causes the battery to drain when the system is
>>>>> powered down and unplugged, which does not happed prior to these two
>>>>> commits.
>>>> What system and what do you mean by "powered down"?  How much time
>>>> does it take for the battery to drain now?
>>> By powered down, the bug reporter is saying physically powered off and
>>> unplugged.  The system is a HP laptop:
>>>
>>> dmi.chassis.vendor: HP
>>> dmi.product.family: 103C_5335KV HP Notebook
>>> dmi.product.name: HP Notebook
>>> vendor_id    : GenuineIntel
>>> cpu family    : 6
>>>
>>>
>>>>> The bisect actually pointed to commit de3ef1e, but reverting
>>>>> these two commits fixes the issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was hoping to get your feedback, since you are the patch author.  Do
>>>>> you think gathering any additional data will help diagnose this issue,
>>>>> or would it be best to submit a revert request?
>>>> First, reverting these is not an option or you will break systems
>>>> relying on them now.  4.13 is three releases back at this point.
>>>>
>>>> Second, your issue appears to be related to the suspend/shutdown path
>>>> whereas commit 0ce3fcaff929 is mostly about resume, so presumably the
>>>> change in pci_enable_wake() causes the problem to happen.  Can you try
>>>> to revert this one alone and see if that helps?
>>> A test kernel with commits 0ce3fcaff929 and de3ef1eb1cd0 reverted was
>>> tested.  However, the test kernel still exhibited the bug.
>> So essentially the bisection result cannot be trusted.
>
> We performed some more testing and confirmed just a revert of the
> following commit resolves the bug:
>
> 0847684cfc5f0 ("PCI / PM: Simplify device wakeup settings code")

Thanks for confirming this!

> Can you think of any suggestions to help debug further?

The root cause of the regression is likely the change in
pci_enable_wake() removing the device_may_wakeup() check from it.

Probably, one of the drivers in the platform calls pci_enable_wake()
directly from its ->shutdown() callback and that causes the device to
be set up for system wakeup which in turn causes the power draw while
the system is off to increase.

I would look at the PCI drivers used on that platform to find which of
them call pci_enable_wake() directly from ->shutdown() and I would
make these calls conditional on device_may_wakeup().