From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 320B1C388F9 for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 15:41:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6C4524640 for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 15:41:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="qz3X7Zuu" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2506206AbgJVPl5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Oct 2020 11:41:57 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44586 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2504625AbgJVPl4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Oct 2020 11:41:56 -0400 Received: from mail-qv1-xf43.google.com (mail-qv1-xf43.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f43]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDE3DC0613CE for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:41:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qv1-xf43.google.com with SMTP id ev17so1063543qvb.3 for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:41:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=kFzuMhGwKMO/HNEyHVw0k27/Nr1jzF+rLeIGFdGk+vc=; b=qz3X7ZuuTEqOCs1ZZYy2/ocxgGZ5qMaycxdu/ELKhFmLG7fsU6KukMf8w2wOYRZFJb yUeGvucW1e7qRhUtd+TY+wc9UPb2Sva+Wjk++Bxv4hTw7zbrHxZ2dNzcveaQtsMbGxno XABHrnAuwZNDHuqhqpTlrHmcAonNx+oCZ8L9ovIUCwGkjEXz0+V6OwXUjMAfkFh74bcD 3MwrtZmL08fWIv+mqJTtQ0jdbfCAexNpNkCeCGZuj8OVIe442gYgjjAFNyzQJnxD+Epq qYceyy/LhteAlK6n5B0yq/x9KM/m8jCVCuxyxYUNkX9DLJ4atQJd5Ls/7EUfKJ5b5pYU +cig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kFzuMhGwKMO/HNEyHVw0k27/Nr1jzF+rLeIGFdGk+vc=; b=bghKzQ0RkAqO9JvzURLNaZxhU+vV8F/iKznNK02L6wVoB2cFUxJKwg2f96d1bf5V2l SrhLBBx4ZDLVEG0cMDBwtQcBvq0ajsZe6CLl5OIyWj80sTrQwowITdynAGW8Gp6epvpg fXHzL2FHzq4OB+gBz+jg57cV8LKkpTi9Ua1OW2ft3IoxaZVJzYzL+6JZ1ExYFq/h8Yo4 vppw1n0axCRL9jAKdtgx7CIgHdi+gzR7EyMNYBg/7afZKuVJs7zLm//iDL6T9ilSaRHK OkWZi1i66NNo2eE+cfho3QuHyis/96hExb5wVrpQOPTkvSyXPqOchINxZHbzbQCzLb+o Ns7g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5325mAkpDgcvBbzoiCS89n9Hx69mJROZs2o2OXNw3gw/Kc4fRhsx acZ4Ty1/J/HJJ3U4jL9M27+aszwcf+JGL4Tiv0I= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyRHehJz7HoSQkuv0q1VzfFaGDDn/VsYDHsIJFPyr/GqnrRI90p8c8ZayyRPDTosM+8gIzDwH1kveV3H77qn+0= X-Received: by 2002:a0c:9e0e:: with SMTP id p14mr2937567qve.25.1603381315904; Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:41:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201022153750.GA503849@bjorn-Precision-5520> In-Reply-To: <20201022153750.GA503849@bjorn-Precision-5520> From: Ian Kumlien Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 17:41:45 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use maximum latency when determining L1 ASPM To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Kai-Heng Feng , linux-pci , Alexander Duyck , "Saheed O. Bolarinwa" , Puranjay Mohan Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 5:37 PM Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 01:35:27PM +0200, Ian Kumlien wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 12:41 AM Ian Kumlien wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 11:28 PM Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > > > Can you please, please, collect these on your system, Ian? I assume > > > > that you can easily collect it once without your patch, when you see > > > > poor I211 NIC performance but the system is otherwise working. And > > > > you can collect it again *with* your patch. Same Kconfig, same > > > > *everything* except adding your patch. > > > > > > Yeah I can do that, but I would like the changes output from the > > > latest patch suggestion > > > running on Kai-Heng's system so we can actually see what it does... > > > > Is: > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=209725 > > That's a great start. Can you attach the patch to the bugzilla too, > please, so it is self-contained? > > And also the analysis of the path from Root Port to Endpoint, with the > exit latencies of each link, the acceptable latency of the endpoint > and > > (1) the computation done by the existing code that results in > "latency < acceptable" that means we can enable ASPM, and > > (2) the correct computation per spec that results in > "latency > acceptable" so we cannot enable ASPM? > > This analysis will be the core of the commit log, and the bugzilla > with lspci info is the supporting evidence. Ok, will do, there will be some bio-latency though Were you ok with the pr_cont output per endpoint? > Bjorn