archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kai-Heng Feng <>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <>,
	"Derrick, Jonathan" <>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <>,
	Rob Herring <>,,,
	Ian Kumlien <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: vmd: Enable ASPM for mobile platforms
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 12:26:19 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201005191930.GA3031652@bjorn-Precision-5520>

> On Oct 6, 2020, at 03:19, Bjorn Helgaas <> wrote:
> [+cc Ian, who's also working on an ASPM issue]
> On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 02:40:32AM +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
>>> On Oct 3, 2020, at 06:18, Bjorn Helgaas <> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 04:24:54PM +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
>>>> BIOS may not be able to program ASPM for links behind VMD, prevent Intel
>>>> SoC from entering deeper power saving state.
>>> It's not a question of BIOS not being *able* to configure ASPM.  I
>>> think BIOS could do it, at least in principle, if it had a driver for
>>> VMD.  Actually, it probably *does* include some sort of VMD code
>>> because it sounds like BIOS can assign some Root Ports to appear
>>> either as regular Root Ports or behind the VMD.
>>> Since this issue is directly related to the unusual VMD topology, I
>>> think it would be worth a quick recap here.  Maybe something like:
>>> VMD is a Root Complex Integrated Endpoint that acts as a host bridge
>>> to a secondary PCIe domain.  BIOS can reassign one or more Root
>>> Ports to appear within a VMD domain instead of the primary domain.
>>> However, BIOS may not enable ASPM for the hierarchies behind a VMD,
>>> ...
>>> (This is based on the commit log from 185a383ada2e ("x86/PCI: Add
>>> driver for Intel Volume Management Device (VMD)")).
>> Ok, will just copy the portion as-is if there's patch v2 :)
>>> But we still have the problem that CONFIG_PCIEASPM_DEFAULT=y means
>>> "use the BIOS defaults", and this patch would make it so we use the
>>> BIOS defaults *except* for things behind VMD.
>>> - Why should VMD be a special case?
>> Because BIOS doesn't handle ASPM for it so it's up to software to do
>> the job.  In the meantime we want other devices still use the BIOS
>> defaults to not introduce any regression.
>>> - How would we document such a special case?
>> I wonder whether other devices that add PCIe domain have the same
>> behavior?  Maybe it's not a special case at all...
> What other devices are these?

Controllers which add PCIe domain.

>> I understand the end goal is to keep consistency for the entire ASPM
>> logic. However I can't think of any possible solution right now.
>>> - If we built with CONFIG_PCIEASPM_POWERSAVE=y, would that solve the
>>>   SoC power state problem?
>> Yes.
>>> - What issues would CONFIG_PCIEASPM_POWERSAVE=y introduce?
>> This will break many systems, at least for the 1st Gen Ryzen
>> desktops and laptops.
>> All PCIe ASPM are not enabled by BIOS, and those systems immediately
>> freeze once ASPM is enabled.
> That indicates a defect in the Linux ASPM code.  We should fix that.
> It should be safe to use CONFIG_PCIEASPM_POWERSAVE=y on every system.

On those systems ASPM are also not enabled on Windows. So I think ASPM are disabled for a reason.

> Are there bug reports for these? The info we would need to start with
> includes "lspci -vv" and dmesg log (with CONFIG_PCIEASPM_DEFAULT=y).
> If a console log with CONFIG_PCIEASPM_POWERSAVE=y is available, that
> might be interesting, too.  We'll likely need to add some
> instrumentation and do some experimentation, but in principle, this
> should be fixable.

Doing this is asking users to use hardware settings that ODM/OEM never tested, and I think the risk is really high.


> Bjorn

  reply	other threads:[~2020-10-07  4:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-09-30  8:24 [PATCH 1/2] PCI/ASPM: Add helper to enable ASPM link Kai-Heng Feng
2020-09-30  8:24 ` [PATCH 2/2] PCI: vmd: Enable ASPM for mobile platforms Kai-Heng Feng
2020-10-02 22:18   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-10-05 18:40     ` Kai-Heng Feng
2020-10-05 19:19       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-10-07  4:26         ` Kai-Heng Feng [this message]
2020-10-07  9:28           ` Ian Kumlien
2020-10-07 13:30           ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-10-07 13:44             ` Ian Kumlien
2020-10-08  4:19             ` Kai-Heng Feng
2020-10-09 14:34               ` Ian Kumlien

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).