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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 A0267C47094 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 14:14:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B3796108E for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 14:14:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230200AbhFGOP6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jun 2021 10:15:58 -0400 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de ([195.135.220.28]:56244 "EHLO smtp-out1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230197AbhFGOP5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jun 2021 10:15:57 -0400 Received: from imap.suse.de (imap-alt.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.47]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC9D5218ED; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 14:14:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1623075245; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=REeQyiyjgnC3iKPNizUEY82J3vFED92KnvEldVrJWQI=; b=BExgBTx8zykLIBjX9hBZH/ScB1tJtiIWfiGbybCePSoVMatYGZfGtxmf1ddINs1dSFTGiW UsQBGfS9VdOQyZeDd/dmVisE83iVJA7Yv+YUEvEvNSDRX1fi9804gIJqnqeEMeYLGJwfP8 tJ/BobECj3w7p5LK/iTG9Us7Xo7laxQ= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1623075245; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=REeQyiyjgnC3iKPNizUEY82J3vFED92KnvEldVrJWQI=; b=eHyZNDOyhmz6gOwoMqPWfYgjDWAbA/42xhdyq6u6EOs4QWu06zw33hUVL77SLd+xp5XcH6 oFq8XkvD2fe/7vDA== Received: from imap3-int (imap-alt.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.47]) by imap.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5912A118DD; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 14:14:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1623075245; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=REeQyiyjgnC3iKPNizUEY82J3vFED92KnvEldVrJWQI=; b=BExgBTx8zykLIBjX9hBZH/ScB1tJtiIWfiGbybCePSoVMatYGZfGtxmf1ddINs1dSFTGiW UsQBGfS9VdOQyZeDd/dmVisE83iVJA7Yv+YUEvEvNSDRX1fi9804gIJqnqeEMeYLGJwfP8 tJ/BobECj3w7p5LK/iTG9Us7Xo7laxQ= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1623075245; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=REeQyiyjgnC3iKPNizUEY82J3vFED92KnvEldVrJWQI=; b=eHyZNDOyhmz6gOwoMqPWfYgjDWAbA/42xhdyq6u6EOs4QWu06zw33hUVL77SLd+xp5XcH6 oFq8XkvD2fe/7vDA== Received: from director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.72]) by imap3-int with ESMTPSA id rNYFFK0pvmCuPQAALh3uQQ (envelope-from ); Mon, 07 Jun 2021 14:14:05 +0000 Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2021 16:14:03 +0200 From: Joerg Roedel To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , Joerg Roedel , Bjorn Helgaas , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Linux PCI , ACPI Devel Maling List , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/APCI: Move acpi_pci_osc_support() check to negotiation phase Message-ID: References: <20210603205047.GA2135380@bjorn-Precision-5520> <20210604170938.GA2218177@bjorn-Precision-5520> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 02:56:24PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 7:09 PM Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > If either "pcie_ports_disabled" or Linux doesn't support everything in > > ACPI_PCIE_REQ_SUPPORT, we will never evaluate _OSC at all, so > > the platform won't know that Linux has OSC_PCI_SEGMENT_GROUPS_SUPPORT, > > OSC_PCI_HPX_TYPE_3_SUPPORT, OSC_PCI_EXT_CONFIG_SUPPORT, etc. > > Right. Thanks Bjorn and Rafael. So I think the important thing to do is to issue at least one _OSC call even when Linux is not trying to take control of anything. I look into a clean way to do this and get the kernel messages right. One thing to change is probably only calculating 'control' if !pcie_ports_disabled in negotiate_os_control(). Regards, Joerg