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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] pci/aspm: Remove CONFIG_PCIEASPM_DEBUG
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc:     Rajat Jain <rajatja@google.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>,
        Vidya Sagar <vidyas@nvidia.com>,
        Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
        Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>,
        Frederick Lawler <fred@fredlawl.com>,
        linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        mayurkumar.patel@intel.com, rajatxjain@gmail.com,
        Richard Hughes <rhughes@redhat.com>,
        Carlos Garnacho <cgarnach@redhat.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Pali Rohar <pali.rohar@gmail.com>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>,
        Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
References: <20180508230148.121852-1-rajatja@google.com>
 <20180510233912.96454-1-rajatja@google.com>
 <20180727202619.GD173328@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>
 <5a102163-73bc-c596-8266-186e222e7ceb@kernel.org>
 <20180730141428.GK173328@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>
From:   Sinan Kaya <okaya@kernel.org>
Message-ID: <2fbc0d1b-0d14-6bab-74c5-a9dd2ae417bb@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 30 Jul 2018 09:08:18 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180730141428.GK173328@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 7/30/2018 7:14 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> However, the end of sec 5.4.1 does make it clear that the functions
> need not have the same ASPM configuration, and it gives rules for how
> those different settings should affect the shared link.  Since it
> mentions different ASPM Control fields for the different functions, I
> assume the policy combining those per-function settings into the
> single link behavior must be implemented in the hardware.

Very interesting. This is news for me.