On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 04:55:35PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 12:53:01AM +0200, Peter Wu wrote: > > Since "PCI: Add runtime PM support for PCIe ports", the parent PCIe port > > can be runtime-suspended which disables power resources via ACPI. This > > is incompatible with DSM, resulting in a GPU device which is still in D3 > > and locks up the kernel on resume. > > > > Mirror the behavior of Windows 8 and newer[1] (as observed via an AMLi > > debugger trace) and stop using the DSM functions for D3cold when power > > resources are available on the parent PCIe port. > > > > [1]: https://msdn.microsoft.com/windows/hardware/drivers/bringup/firmware-requirements-for-d3cold > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Wu <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c > > index df9f73e..e469df7 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c > > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ static struct nouveau_dsm_priv { > > bool dsm_detected; > > bool optimus_detected; > > bool optimus_flags_detected; > > + bool optimus_skip_dsm; > > acpi_handle dhandle; > > acpi_handle rom_handle; > > } nouveau_dsm_priv; > > @@ -212,8 +213,26 @@ static const struct vga_switcheroo_handler nouveau_dsm_handler = { > > .get_client_id = nouveau_dsm_get_client_id, > > }; > > > > +/* Firmware supporting Windows 8 or later do not use _DSM to put the device into > > + * D3cold, they instead rely on disabling power resources on the parent. */ > > +static bool nouveau_pr3_present(struct pci_dev *pdev) > > +{ > > + struct pci_dev *parent_pdev = pci_upstream_bridge(pdev); > > + struct acpi_device *ad; > > Nit: please call this adev instead of ad. Will do. > > + > > + if (!parent_pdev) > > + return false; > > + > > + ad = ACPI_COMPANION(&parent_pdev->dev); > > + if (!ad) > > + return false; > > + > > + return ad->power.flags.power_resources; > > Is this sufficient to tell if the parent device has _PR3? I thought it > returns true if it has power resources in general, not necessarily _PR3. > > Otherwise this looks okay to me. It is indeed set whenever there is any _PRx method. I wonder if it is appropriate to access fields directly like this, perhaps this would be more accurate (based on device_pm.c): /* Check whether the _PR3 method is available. */ return adev->power.states[ACPI_STATE_D3_COLD].flags.valid; I am also considering adding a check in case the pcieport driver does not support D3cold via runtime PM, what do you think of this? if (!parent_pdev) return false; /* If the PCIe port does not support D3cold via runtime PM, allow a * fallback to the Optimus DSM method to put the device in D3cold. */ if (parent_pdev->no_d3cold) return false; This is needed to avoid the regression reported in the cover letter, but also allows pre-2015 systems to (still) have the D3cold possibility. Out of curiosity I looked up an pre-2015 laptop (found Acer V5-573G, apparently from November 2013, Windows 8.1) and extracted the ACPI tables from the BIOS images. BIOS 2.28 (2014/05/13) introduces support for power resources on the parent devicea(\_SB.PCI0.PEG0._PR3 and a related NVP3 device) when _OSI("Windows 2013") is true. (This is added as alternative for the old DSM interface.) Maybe 2014 is also an appropriate cutoff date? I wonder if it is feasible to detect firmware use of _OSI("Windows 2013") and use that instead of the BIOS year. -- Kind regards, Peter Wu https://lekensteyn.nl _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
