Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:2 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:2;
Message-ID: <970144d9b5c3d36dbd0d50f01c1c4355cd42de89.camel@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] PCI/ASPM: Add locked helper for enabling link
 state
From:   "David E. Box" <david.e.box@linux.intel.com>
Reply-To: david.e.box@linux.intel.com
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>,
        Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>
Cc:     Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@kernel.org>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof =?UTF-8?Q?Wilczy=C5=84ski?= <kw@linux.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
        Nirmal Patel <nirmal.patel@linux.intel.com>,
        Jonathan Derrick <jonathan.derrick@linux.dev>,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 13 Dec 2023 11:48:41 -0800
In-Reply-To: <20231212212707.GA1021099@bhelgaas>
References: <20231212212707.GA1021099@bhelgaas>
Organization: David E. Box
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.4-0ubuntu2 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 2023-12-12 at 15:27 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 11:48:27AM +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 4:47=E2=80=AFAM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.or=
g> wrote:
> > ...
>=20
> > > I hope we can obsolete this whole idea someday.=C2=A0 Using pci_walk_=
bus()
> > > in qcom and vmd to enable ASPM is an ugly hack to work around this
> > > weird idea that "the OS isn't allowed to enable more ASPM states than
> > > the BIOS did because the BIOS might have left ASPM disabled because i=
t
> > > knows about hardware issues."=C2=A0 More history at
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20230615070421.1704133-1-kai.heng.f=
eng@canonical.com/T/#u
> > >=20
> > > I think we need to get to a point where Linux enables all supported
> > > ASPM features by default.=C2=A0 If we really think x86 BIOS assumes a=
n
> > > implicit contract that the OS will never enable ASPM more
> > > aggressively, we might need some kind of arch quirk for that.
> >=20
> > The reality is that PC ODM toggles ASPM to workaround hardware
> > defects, assuming that OS will honor what's set by the BIOS.
> > If ASPM gets enabled for all devices, many devices will break.
>=20
> That's why I mentioned some kind of arch quirk.=C2=A0 Maybe we're forced =
to
> do that for x86, for instance.=C2=A0 But even that is a stop-gap.
>=20
> The idea that the BIOS ASPM config is some kind of handoff protocol is
> really unsupportable.

To be clear, you are not talking about a situation where ACPI_FADT_NO_ASPM =
or
_OSC PCIe disallow OS ASPM control, right? Everyone agrees that this should=
 be
honored? The question is what to do by default when the OS is not restricte=
d by
these mechanisms?

Reading the mentioned thread, I too think that using the BIOS config as the
default would be the safest option, but only to avoid breaking systems, not
because of an implied contract between the BIOS and OS. However, enabling a=
ll
capable ASPM features is the ideal option. If the OS isn't limited by
ACPI_FADT_NO_ASPM or _OSC PCIe, then ASPM enabling is fully under its contr=
ol.
If this doesn't work for some devices then they are broken and need a quirk=
.

David