Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755533Ab2BOLzT (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Feb 2012 06:55:19 -0500 Received: from coyote.quickmin.net ([217.14.112.24]:57505 "EHLO coyote.quickmin.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751372Ab2BOLzS (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Feb 2012 06:55:18 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 400 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 15 Feb 2012 06:55:17 EST Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=telemotive.de; b=pXeoEyozgGCUoUJ7ik9LoC4nVWN9ZWDRa27891ck0uhNte7iYMtG/g2NGF3uQrXJyPRAzIIEUEM2eDAKhnoqo7DWJCIcFEEfed0OXn1YX58Fj0bf5UpXvymFTq2QDdTKqJr4gRF39rVBP9JIfM4kqOmoSmS3hPmv6jv4d//6N5Y= ; From: Roman Fietze Organization: Telemotive AG To: Shaohua Li Subject: ASPM, devices with mixed PCIe/PCI functions Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 12:48:34 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/2.6.37.6-0.11-default; KDE/4.6.5; x86_64; ; ) Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <201202151248.34578.roman.fietze@telemotive.de> X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on muc/Telemotive(Release 8.5.3|September 15, 2011) at 15.02.2012 12:48:34, Serialize by Router on muc/Telemotive(Release 8.5.3|September 15, 2011) at 15.02.2012 12:48:34, Serialize complete at 15.02.2012 12:48:34 X-TNEFEvaluated: 1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1264 Lines: 33 Hello, I'm referring to commit ddc9753fcddfe5f. On our system we use a PCIe-Local-Bridge, the PEX8311, which internally is a quick and dirty design glued together using a PEX8111 and a PEX9056. I'm now just talking about the PEX8111, which is a PCIe to PCI-X bridge. The function pcie_aspm_sanity_check() in drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c disables ASPM for this bridge, because the child (PEX9056) is not PCIe, hereby disabling power savings on the upstream PCIe link. Is this a flaw? What is the reason for this? Could please someone with more PCI(e) knowledge enlighten me? I'm of course willing to deliver a patch to fix this (IMHO) problem, but this only makes sense if I'm not totally wrong in my assumption, that ASPM should be enabled on such devices (besides the fact, that the PEX8111 does not have PCI_EXP_DEVCAP_RBER set). Roman -- Roman Fietze Telemotive AG Buero Muehlhausen Breitwiesen 73347 Muehlhausen Tel.: +49(0)7335/18493-45 http://www.telemotive.de -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/