On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 10:54:29AM -0700, Raul Rangel wrote: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 10:30 AM Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 08:55:02AM -0700, Raul Rangel wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 8:03 AM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2023 at 2:48 PM Mario Limonciello > > > > <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx> wrote: ... > > > We still need to figure out a proper fix for this. If you read my post > > > here: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/2357#note_1732372 > > > I think we misinterpreted what the SharedAndWake bit is used for. To > > > me it sounds like it's only valid for HW Reduced ACPI platforms, and > > > S0ix. My changes made it so we call `dev_pm_set_wake_irq` when the > > > Wake bit is set. Does anyone have any additional context on the Wake > > > bit? I think we either need to make `dev_pm_set_wake_irq` (or a > > > variant) only enable the wake on S0i3, or we can teach the ACPI > > > subsystem to manage arming the IRQ's wake bit. Kind of like we already > > > manage the GPE events for the device. > > > > From the spec: > > > > Shared is an optional argument and can be one of Shared, Exclusive, > > SharedAndWake or ExclusiveAndWake. If not specified, Exclusive is assumed. > > The “Wake” designation indicates that the interrupt is capable of waking > > the system from a low-power idle state or a system sleep state. The bit > > field name _SHR is automatically created to refer to this portion of > > the resource descriptor. > > > > > > Note: "...a low-power idle state or a system sleep state.". I believe it > > applies to both. > > Without the _PRW, how do we determine the valid system sleep states > the device can wake the system from? Good question. I believe you need to ask somebody from ASWG for the clarifications. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
