Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] drop low power policy board type

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 10:13:41PM +0100, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> The series is based on top of:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/libata/linux.git/log/?h=for-next
> 
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> This revives a patch sent out almost two years ago from Mario Limonciello:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ide/20220524170508.563-1-mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx/T/#u
> 
> The reason why we did not merge it back then, is because LPM and hotplug
> events are mutually exclusive.
> 
> The difference with this series compared to what was sent out back then:
> I've added a patch that checks if the port is external, i.e. either
> hotplug capable or eSATA. For external ports, we never enable LPM, as
> that will break hotplug.
> 
> For ports that do not advertise themselves as external (typically laptops),
> we set the LPM policy as requested.
> 
> This matches how Microsoft Windows does things, see:
> https://studylib.net/doc/10034428/esata---microsoft-center
> 
> Thanks to Werner Fischer for suggesting something like this at last year's
> ALPSS conference.
> 
> There might of course be some platform firmware that e.g. incorrectly marks
> its port as internal, even though it is external, but if we find any such
> platforms we will need to deal with them using quirks.
> 
> 
> Also note that we even if the user requested a certain policy, there is
> no guarantee that he will get all the features for that policy, see:
> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/drivers/ata/libata-sata.c#L403-L414
> 
> However, I'd rather we not try to map all the combinations of
> partial/slumber/devsleep in to a single policy represented by a single
> integer, thus I do not try to "change" the requested policy.
> The user will get all the features that are included in the requested
> policy AND supported by the HBA.
> 
> Another difference (compared to an earlier version of Mario's series)
> is that we do not try to change the default CONFIG_SATA_MOBILE_LPM_POLICY
> value from 0 to 3, it will continue to be 0.
> If you really don't want LPM even if your HBA supports it, and your port
> is internal, one option is to leave the Kconfig set to the default value.
> 
> Damien: considering that the Intel VMD + ahci_intel_pcs_quirk() bug turned
> out to have nothing to do with LPM, it was simply the fact that the
> ahci_intel_pcs_quirk() was only applied if there was an explicit entry in
> ahci_pci_tbl. So since that bug is totally unrelated to LPM, I no longer
> think that this series need to wait for a fix for that bug.
> 
> 
> Link to v1:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ide/20240201161507.1147521-1-cassel@xxxxxxxxxx/
> 
> Changes since v1:
> -Picked up tags from Damien.
> -Moved the comment in front of ahci_mark_external_port() to inside the
>  function.
> -Modified the comment in patch 4/5 to more clearly state hotplug removal
>  events.
> -Rewrote the commit message for patch 4/5 to be more detailed.
> 
> 
> Kind regards,
> Niklas
> 
> 
> Mario Limonciello (1):
>   ata: ahci: Drop low power policy board type
> 
> Niklas Cassel (4):
>   ata: ahci: move marking of external port earlier
>   ata: ahci: a hotplug capable port is an external port
>   ata: ahci: drop hpriv param from ahci_update_initial_lpm_policy()
>   ata: ahci: do not enable LPM on external ports
> 
>  drivers/ata/Kconfig   |   5 +-
>  drivers/ata/ahci.c    | 135 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>  drivers/ata/ahci.h    |   9 +--
>  drivers/ata/libahci.c |   7 ---
>  4 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 78 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 

Applied:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/libata/linux.git/log/?h=for-6.9




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux RAID]     [Git]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Newbie]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux