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=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 17FD8C3A589 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 20:48:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9E8422DD6 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 20:48:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1566334128; bh=peTOprTSNKN91AIRo5AL4yoNB2QzHqj8+ADn6ARi+ck=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=M7voMLMrtEOsxvoGuEFG4Novd9j9GRFFSF3Nz7nU02mpFfIYfa9RmYyMJW1bwDmS/ SEZerrplsKiSljzlHeurOcXrGuOyspHNJRztKFA4ovYe5PQgGnypoCpbyePvEy3qXf 16Z+PU7zuM9Trh0e+ec4iN1Ov1q8NnirkEiKmugw= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730174AbfHTUss (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Aug 2019 16:48:48 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:42850 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729833AbfHTUss (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Aug 2019 16:48:48 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [69.71.4.100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2FF1E22DD3; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 20:48:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1566334127; bh=peTOprTSNKN91AIRo5AL4yoNB2QzHqj8+ADn6ARi+ck=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=2DvEK0GTkQzfjMUG8wTzNClG9n4qxmDXMYtNqIZDCHW1zGVKMmUMZjxmEVwbNMZyt UIAS8/ZrUkT/uc6yRTTZWfiesEABMTTPrUEiswKsSyxU0WgV/iw+7+xPKqXPEsdxFd ZbDn3cnaWjXOMswTE6AzNNa1JOQP1I7PB5SeCNMc= Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 15:48:45 -0500 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: Rajat Jain Cc: Heiner Kallweit , Frederick Lawler , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , Greg KH Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] PCI/ASPM: add sysfs attribute for controlling ASPM Message-ID: <20190820204845.GD14450@google.com> References: <7a6d2f14-f2a6-99ad-3a93-fdaa0726ce86@gmail.com> <20190820103400.GY253360@google.com> <20190820193252.GB14450@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 12:51:09PM -0700, Rajat Jain wrote: > > May be we're digressing now, but I'd like to point out that there is > atleast one more file in ASPM that potentially violates the "1 value > per file" rule: > > rajatja@rajat2:/sys/module/pcie_aspm/parameters$ cat policy > [default] performance powersave powersupersave > rajatja@rajat2:/sys/module/pcie_aspm/parameters$ > > ... although I would argue in this case that it makes it much clear > what are the allowable values to write, and which is the current > selected one. Huh, that's a good point. That "policy" file is a little problematic for several reasons, one being the config options (CONFIG_PCIEASPM_PERFORMANCE, CONFIG_PCIEASPM_POWERSAVE, etc) that lock a distro into some default choice. Maybe there's something we can do there, although there's legacy use to consider (there are a zillion web pages that document pcie_aspm/parameters/policy as a way to fix things), and it's certainly beyond the scope of *this* series. Bjorn