Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932308Ab2JZLOK (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Oct 2012 07:14:10 -0400 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([193.178.161.156]:39090 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754136Ab2JZLOH (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Oct 2012 07:14:07 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Huang Ying Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: PCI/PM: Add comments for PME poll support for PCIe Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 13:18:04 +0200 Message-ID: <3515628.KRd0S4T47k@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.8.5 (Linux/3.6.3-8-desktop; KDE/4.8.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <1351228071-15161-1-git-send-email-ying.huang@intel.com> References: <1351228071-15161-1-git-send-email-ying.huang@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2846 Lines: 65 On Friday, October 26, 2012 01:07:51 PM Huang Ying wrote: > There are comments on why PME poll support is necessary for PCI > devices, but not for PCIe devices. That may lead to misunderstanding > that PME poll is only necessary for PCI devices. So add comments > related to PCIe PME poll to make it more clear. > > The content of comments comes from the changelog of commit: > > 379021d5c0899fcf9410cae4ca7a59a5a94ca769 > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki > Signed-off-by: Huang Ying Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki > --- > drivers/pci/pci.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c > @@ -1578,15 +1578,25 @@ void pci_pme_active(struct pci_dev *dev, > > pci_write_config_word(dev, dev->pm_cap + PCI_PM_CTRL, pmcsr); > > - /* PCI (as opposed to PCIe) PME requires that the device have > - its PME# line hooked up correctly. Not all hardware vendors > - do this, so the PME never gets delivered and the device > - remains asleep. The easiest way around this is to > - periodically walk the list of suspended devices and check > - whether any have their PME flag set. The assumption is that > - we'll wake up often enough anyway that this won't be a huge > - hit, and the power savings from the devices will still be a > - win. */ > + /* > + * PCI (as opposed to PCIe) PME requires that the device have > + * its PME# line hooked up correctly. Not all hardware vendors > + * do this, so the PME never gets delivered and the device > + * remains asleep. The easiest way around this is to > + * periodically walk the list of suspended devices and check > + * whether any have their PME flag set. The assumption is that > + * we'll wake up often enough anyway that this won't be a huge > + * hit, and the power savings from the devices will still be a > + * win. > + * > + * Although PCIe uses in-band PME message instead of PME# line > + * to report PME, PME does not work for some PCIe devices in > + * reality. For example, there are devices that set their PME > + * status bits, but don't really bother to send a PME message; > + * there are PCI Express Root Ports that don't bother to > + * trigger interrupts when they receive PME messages from the > + * devices below. So PME poll is used for PCIe devices too. > + */ > > if (dev->pme_poll) { > struct pci_pme_device *pme_dev; > -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. -- 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/