Return-path: Received: from mail-ob0-f175.google.com ([209.85.214.175]:61416 "EHLO mail-ob0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762805Ab3DHQ2d (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Apr 2013 12:28:33 -0400 Received: by mail-ob0-f175.google.com with SMTP id va7so6045209obc.34 for ; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 09:28:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20130304134949.GB3021@redhat.com> <20130304154832.GD3021@redhat.com> From: Bjorn Helgaas Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:28:13 -0600 Message-ID: (sfid-20130408_182853_521254_6DBD8318) Subject: Re: is L1 really disabled in iwlwifi To: Emmanuel Grumbach Cc: Stanislaw Gruszka , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , linux-wireless , John Linville , Roman Yepishev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 6:23 AM, Emmanuel Grumbach wrote: >>> >>> I attached all the data you needed. >>> The link state seems to go to L1 based on the low power the NIC consumes. >>> So it seems that even if we use pci_disable_link_state() to disabled >>> L1, L1 is still disabled. >>> >> >> Ugh... so doesn't make any sense.... so again: >> >> So it seems that even if we use pci_disable_link_state() to disable >> L1, the link state still enters L1. > > ping? :-) Sorry, I haven't had a chance to look at this yet. Can you please attach the *complete* dmesg and lspci output, not just the parts that mention iwlwifi? Some of this depends on other PCI core stuff, like what happened with the _OSC evaluation when we discovered the PCI host bridge. Bjorn