Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-128317-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2024 10:08:02 -0600
From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
To: Georg Gottleuber <g.gottleuber@tuxedocomputers.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Werner Sembach <wse@tuxedocomputers.com>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
	Georg Gottleuber <ggo@tuxedocomputers.com>,
	linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: Add sleep quirk for Samsung 990 Evo
Message-ID: <ZgwtYpbcyM_ffjaF@kbusch-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
References: <20240328130923.61752-1-wse@tuxedocomputers.com>
 <20240402131658.GA31963@lst.de>
 <230e3f41-9f6b-42fd-a411-567abbaebbbe@tuxedocomputers.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <230e3f41-9f6b-42fd-a411-567abbaebbbe@tuxedocomputers.com>

On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 05:13:48PM +0200, Georg Gottleuber wrote:
> Am 02.04.24 um 15:16 schrieb Christoph Hellwig:
> > On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 02:09:22PM +0100, Werner Sembach wrote:
> > > From: Georg Gottleuber <ggo@tuxedocomputers.com>
> > > 
> > > On some TUXEDO platforms, a Samsung 990 Evo NVMe leads to a high
> > > power consumption in s2idle sleep (2-3 watts).
> > > 
> > > This patch applies 'Force No Simple Suspend' quirk to achieve a
> > > sleep with a lower power consumption, typically around 0.5 watts.
> > 
> > Does this only apply to a specific SSD or all SSDs on this platform?
> > How do these platforms even get into the conditional?  Probably
> > through acpi_storage_d3 setting, which probably is set incorrectly
> > for the platform?  Any chance to just fix that?
> 
> Yes, this only apply to a specific SSD. I tested these SSDs (on
> PH4PRX1_PH6PRX1):
> * Kingston NV1, SNVS250G
> * Samsung 980, MZ-V8V500
> * Samsung 970 Evo, S46DNX0K900454D
> * Samsung 980 Pro, S69ENX0T709932L
> 
> S2idle consumes around 0.4 watts with these SSDs. But with a Samsung 990 Evo
> s2idle on this platform consumes 3.7 to 4.4 watts (6.8 vs 6.5 kernel).

For all these different SSDs you tested in this platform, do you see the
"platform quirk: setting simple suspend" in the dmesg? I just want to
confirm if the platform is changing the reported acpi_storage_d3 value
for different SSD models or if they're all the same.