From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: rafael@kernel.org (Rafael J. Wysocki)
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 11:06:17 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] nvme-pci: Allow PCI bus-level PM to be used if ASPM is
 disabled
In-Reply-To: <20190808084804.GA31404@lst.de>
References: <47415939.KV5G6iaeJG@kreacher>
 <20190730144134.GA12844@localhost.localdomain>
 <100ba4aff1c6434a81e47774ab4acddc@AUSX13MPC105.AMER.DELL.COM>
 <8246360B-F7D9-42EB-94FC-82995A769E28@canonical.com>
 <20190730191934.GD13948@localhost.localdomain>
 <7d3e0b8ba1444194a153c93faa1cabb3@AUSX13MPC105.AMER.DELL.COM>
 <20190730213114.GK13948@localhost.localdomain>
 <CAJZ5v0gxfeMN8eCNRjcXmUOkReVsdozb3EccaYMpnmSHu3771g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190731221956.GB15795@localhost.localdomain> <2583975.4sIyE3leJj@kreacher>
 <20190808084804.GA31404@lst.de>
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0hTJKPi1zfB_RjuZ415-JjmK2nVP7mss3npqoB3+Xvy4w@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Aug 8, 2019@10:48 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
>
> > -     ndev->last_ps = 0;
> >       ret = nvme_get_power_state(ctrl, &ndev->last_ps);
> > -     if (ret < 0)
> > +     if (ret < 0 || ndev->last_ps == U32_MAX)
>
> Is the intent of the magic U32_MAX check to see if the
> nvme_get_power_state failed at the nvme level?  In that case just
> checking for any non-zero return value from nvme_get_power_state might
> be the easier and more clear way to do it.

Now that I think of that, it appears redundant.  I'll drop it.

>
> > Index: linux-pm/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
> > +++ linux-pm/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
>
> Shouldn't we split PCI vs nvme in two patches?

That can be done.

> > @@ -1170,6 +1170,26 @@ static int pcie_aspm_get_policy(char *bu
> >  module_param_call(policy, pcie_aspm_set_policy, pcie_aspm_get_policy,
> >       NULL, 0644);
> >
> > +/*
> > + * pcie_aspm_enabled - Return the mask of enabled ASPM link states.
> > + * @pci_device: Target device.
> > + */
> > +u32 pcie_aspm_enabled(struct pci_dev *pci_device)
>
> pcie_aspm_enabled sounds like it returns a boolean.  Shouldn't there be
> a mask or so in the name better documenting what it returns?

OK

> > +{
> > +     struct pci_dev *bridge = pci_upstream_bridge(pci_device);
> > +     u32 ret;
> > +
> > +     if (!bridge)
> > +             return 0;
> > +
> > +     mutex_lock(&aspm_lock);
> > +     ret = bridge->link_state ? bridge->link_state->aspm_enabled : 0;
> > +     mutex_unlock(&aspm_lock);
> > +
> > +     return ret;
> > +}
>
> I think this will need a EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL thrown in so that modular
> nvme continues working.

Right, sorry.

> > +
> > +
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_PCIEASPM_DEBUG
>
> Nit: double blank line here.

Overlooked, will fix.

Thanks!