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 26DECC433E7 for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 11:35:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C949521655 for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 11:35:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="pljsNfh9" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726619AbgJRLfl (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Oct 2020 07:35:41 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46220 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726617AbgJRLfl (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Oct 2020 07:35:41 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x743.google.com (mail-qk1-x743.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::743]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1968C061755 for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 04:35:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x743.google.com with SMTP id x20so5764891qkn.1 for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 04:35:39 -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=LRsXpjulKclQsZReY9ZC9kN9qaflaz0NAuODSgAB6oE=; b=pljsNfh9k2iEWOtXc/HybsW3lv8Nmz55NBLu29d9RYU0wIrCby18xXBO4LDkNHOPJ7 AXGOaoN/8Xk+JPuz1HYNyjuPfGwCscGKtLXBZsHw6tOkEeiqmrGo1UcMmqzckL6cW6s+ a0fU/wZoob2A3ruilBEcWG4EdDldnLFVoIp7wtPtFjJ7zloX8x+zNMcg5zsVPEAH5xgN 7R3bOFnSSjLCnwSyVCMh29H+LAxszdKaDJEWidXwLhVkrzzNfelAYCNLtFnb+HWg7h5F zqWHolF58Tlr5e1D/YNhkXnUqqGIW0/YkJZoROhbMv40m2ra7khuk9yxYEK2FPL0fCI2 C3jg== 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=LRsXpjulKclQsZReY9ZC9kN9qaflaz0NAuODSgAB6oE=; b=rvKpho9juZ4U37DIo2yC67wI2girLbGc0yMHrQ86H96n3OjLoAvwd1SqsnjykhNsws T1lSovZKTvyQaZURyCOCVjkoaBDC44u5KNST4ItjUJWxLDs1ngQlvZJQTyY4wOMpKwJA AY56/PtESxMTfbD48QNNLJ3LopXjmEwwoEbfQ+nkrTbN27ghUhVJIiqKu0awzFuU071b 1Jqj0i7RSmxrZmwibBCLwy+7Ue46JlA3avrgJ/OxPK/gGfl7KU6IE97M9bLVoMBoh9uG +JwEFf/NifbasfVqSk17yoJNUEIooEweTk6EJon7WkVZtOganiGS6FuYJysYyLj5xzPe 2erQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530y7C2MgboYNI0NDeL9EVNxhhPwvJslpD2k13/BuSOgPF0M/bFX kRZmwv2H8b7t9w7pU/iKsjKfUOqCSvGos+mh9GM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyYcXNYVhcMfT9j9KLHhMVrOcg4OkfUvd5RTY0uiFauCr3DGk+ngb1IrEtT5qfOgiWvn4IxLuF5YsvEljDPdnU= X-Received: by 2002:a37:a187:: with SMTP id k129mr12135401qke.435.1603020938477; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 04:35:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201016212846.GA109479@bjorn-Precision-5520> In-Reply-To: From: Ian Kumlien Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 13:35:27 +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 Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 12:41 AM Ian Kumlien wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 11:28 PM Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 03:33:17PM +0200, Ian Kumlien wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 10:34 AM Kai-Heng Feng > > > wrote: > > > > > On Oct 12, 2020, at 18:20, Ian Kumlien wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 6:13 PM Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > > > > >> OK, now we're getting close. We just need to flesh out the > > > > >> justification. We need: > > > > >> > > > > >> - Tidy subject line. Use "git log --oneline drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c" > > > > >> and follow the example. > > > > > > > > > > Will do > > > > > > > > > >> - Description of the problem. I think it's poor bandwidth on your > > > > >> Intel I211 device, but we don't have the complete picture because > > > > >> that NIC is 03:00.0, which doesn't appear above at all. > > > > > > > > > > I think we'll use Kai-Hengs issue, since it's actually more related to > > > > > the change itself... > > > > > > > > > > Mine is a side effect while Kai-Heng is actually hitting an issue > > > > > caused by the bug. > > > > > > > > I filed a bug here: > > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=209671 > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > Sigh. I feel like I'm just not getting anywhere here. I still do not > > have a "before" and "after" set of lspci output. > > > > Kai-Heng's bugzilla has two sets of output, but one is a working > > config with CONFIG_PCIEASPM_DEFAULT=y and the other is a working > > config with Ian's patch applied and CONFIG_PCIEASPM_POWERSAVE=y. > > > > Comparing them doesn't show the effect of Ian's patch; it shows the > > combined effect of Ian's patch and the CONFIG_PCIEASPM_POWERSAVE=y > > change. I'm not really interested in spending a few hours trying to > > reverse-engineer the important changes. > > > > 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 More to your liking? > > Bjorn