On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 10:18:07AM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote: > On 8/3/2023 10:14, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 06:38:45AM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote: > > > On 8/3/23 00:01, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 03:10:13PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote: > > > > > @@ -3036,11 +3044,8 @@ bool pci_bridge_d3_possible(struct pci_dev *bridge) > > > > > if (dmi_check_system(bridge_d3_blacklist)) > > > > > return false; > > > > > - /* > > > > > - * It should be safe to put PCIe ports from 2015 or newer > > > > > - * to D3. > > > > > - */ > > > > > - if (dmi_get_bios_year() >= 2015) > > > > > + /* the platform indicates in a device constraint that D3 is needed */ > > > > > + if (platform_constraint_d3(bridge)) > > > > > > > > This for sure causes some sort of power regression on the Intel > > > > platforms made after 2015. Why not check for the constraint and: > > > > > > > Are you sure? I saw it as an explanation of how Windows could put the > > > systems into D3 when there is no other PM related ACPI objects. > > > > I'm concerned if there are no PEP constraints on some of the affected > > systems this now leaves root ports into D0 then, no? > > Do you have any idea if any of the affected systems were something that > didn't ship with Windows? Like an Apple system or a Chromebook? Some of them, at least the Apollo Lake ones were used in IVI systems that did not run Windows IIRC. > If so; I'd think it's better to treat those as "quirks" rather than make a > blanket policy from the timing. It is possible that the quirk list ends up being rather big (or not) so it may be considered something that is painful to maintain.
