From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752738Ab3HAUAO (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Aug 2013 16:00:14 -0400 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:57356 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751094Ab3HAUAK (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Aug 2013 16:00:10 -0400 Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 22:00:09 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Greg KH , kernel list , Joe Lawrence , Myron Stowe , Jeff Kirsher , Jesse Brandeburg , Bruce Allan , Carolyn Wyborny , Don Skidmore , Greg Rose , Peter P Waskiewicz Jr , Alex Duyck , John Ronciak , Tushar Dave , "e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Subject: Re: /sys/module/pcie_aspm/parameters/policy not writable? Message-ID: <20130801200008.GA5495@amd.pavel.ucw.cz> References: <20130709012611.GA22371@amd.pavel.ucw.cz> <20130709041321.GA30555@kroah.com> <20130709094906.GA3870@amd.pavel.ucw.cz> <20130709101039.GA4479@amd.pavel.ucw.cz> <20130710132950.GA3684@amd.pavel.ucw.cz> <20130712111121.GB3515@amd.pavel.ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > But since the problem also occurs with Windows, it's pretty likely > > that there's a BIOS update to fix it. I notice on the X60 support > > page that there are several versions newer than what you're running. > > Do you have any interest in trying a newer BIOS to see if it's fixed > there? If not, I understand; BIOS updates are a hassle at best. > You're running BIOS 2.14, and it looks like the current BIOS for an > X60 1709 7HU is 2.19 (from http://support.lenovo.com). I'm lost at the lenovo pages :-(. And frankly I'd prefer not to touch the BIOS. > Carolyn's patch will likely work, at least most of the time, but I > think there's a small possibility that it could cause a conflict > between the BIOS and the OS over ASPM control, so I'm not 100% in > support of that approach. A conflict may not happen on your > machine, Can we base it on DMI whitelist? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html