Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-21692-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <954f0b86-dd9e-4d84-8d67-fba7e80bc94e@5challer.de> <20240105155100.GA1861423@bhelgaas>
In-Reply-To: <20240105155100.GA1861423@bhelgaas>
From: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 11:43:58 +0800
Message-ID: <CAAd53p5Eg4J9bRtAHY+JZ11cy1D0TnKmAaLfzcRJzw15VRBxXw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Regression] [PCI/ASPM] [ASUS PN51] Reboot on resume attempt
 (bisect done; commit found)
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: Michael Schaller <michael@5challer.de>, bhelgaas@google.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, regressions@lists.linux.dev, macro@orcam.me.uk, 
	ajayagarwal@google.com, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com, 
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, hkallweit1@gmail.com, 
	michael.a.bottini@linux.intel.com, johan+linaro@kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 11:51=E2=80=AFPM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> =
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 12:18:32PM +0100, Michael Schaller wrote:
> > On 05.01.24 04:25, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
> > > Just wondering, does `echo 0 > /sys/power/pm_asysnc` help?
> >
> > Yes, `echo 0 | sudo tee /sys/power/pm_async` does indeed also result in=
 a
> > working resume. I've tested this on kernel 6.6.9 (which still has commi=
t
> > 08d0cc5f3426). I've also attached the relevant dmesg output of the
> > suspend/resume cycle in case this helps.
>
> Thanks for testing that!
>
> > Furthermore does this mean that commit 08d0cc5f3426 isn't at fault but
> > rather that we are dealing with a timing issue?
>
> PCI does have a few software timing requirements, mostly related to
> reset and power state (D0/D3cold).  ASPM has some timing parameters,
> too, but I think they're all requirements on the hardware, not on
> software.
>
> Adding an arbitrary delay anywhere shouldn't break anything, and other
> than those few required situations, it shouldn't fix anything either.

At least it means 8d0cc5f3426 isn't the culprit?

Michael, does the issue happen when iwlwifi module is not loaded? It
can be related to iwlwifi firmware.

Kai-Heng

>
> Bjorn