From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751177AbcFDMXA (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Jun 2016 08:23:00 -0400 Received: from lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk ([81.2.110.251]:49696 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750847AbcFDMW6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Jun 2016 08:22:58 -0400 Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2016 13:22:13 +0100 From: Alan To: "dbasehore ." Cc: Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel , Linux-pm mailing list , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Pavel Machek , Len Brown , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] intel_idle: Add S0ix validation Message-ID: <20160604132213.18eb7d82@lxorguk.ukuu.orguk> In-Reply-To: References: <1464842009-21789-1-git-send-email-dbasehore@chromium.org> <1464842009-21789-6-git-send-email-dbasehore@chromium.org> <20160602092505.GQ3206@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20160602142318.2c9d2111@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20160602205338.4a16760a@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Organization: Intel Corporation X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.2 (GTK+ 2.24.30; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I would expect those IP blocks to do nothing and not block lower power > states if the firmware is not loaded. If that is not the case, I think > that should be fixed such that those lower power states are at least > available during suspend (if not during runtime). If your Skylake+ > system is not entering S0ix during freeze, I consider that a bug that > needs to be addressed. You would assume wrongly. Several parts of the system do their own power management so if present need to have a driver loaded. Graphics is the example everyone is familiar with but ADSP audio and ISH are two others. > configs, that's their decision. As I said, this does nothing in the > !CONFIG_INTEL_PMC_CORE case, but if a finer level config is warranted, > I can add that. IMHO it belongs as a config item because it has a power cost, and you can't turn it off without enabling debugfs when it's compiled in. > I would prefer if others used this more, since there would be better > debug coverage and I would have to fix fewer bugs. I'd be more concerned about getting 10,000 emails bisecting the warning to your commit 8) Alan