On 17.11.2020 17:57, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 5:38 PM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> [+to Rafael, author of the commit you mentioned,
>> +cc Mika, Kai Heng, Lukas, linux-pm, linux-kernel]
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 04:56:09PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>>> More than 10 yrs ago Runtime PM was disabled per default by bb910a7040
>>> ("PCI/PM Runtime: Make runtime PM of PCI devices inactive by default").
>>>
>>> Reason given: "avoid breakage on systems where ACPI-based wake-up is
>>> known to fail for some devices"
>>> Unfortunately the commit message doesn't mention any affected devices
>>> or systems.
>
> Even if it did that, it wouldn't have been a full list almost for sure.
>
> We had received multiple problem reports related to that, most likely
> because the ACPI PM in BIOSes at that time was tailored for
> system-wide PM transitions only.
>
To follow up on this discussion:
We could call pm_runtime_forbid() conditionally, e.g. with the following
condition. This would enable runtime pm per default for all non-ACPI
systems, and it uses the BIOS date as an indicator for a hopefully
not that broken ACPI implementation. However I could understand the
argument that this looks a little hacky ..
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI) && dmi_get_bios_year() <= 2016)
>>> With Runtime PM disabled e.g. the PHY on network devices may remain
>>> powered up even with no cable plugged in, affecting battery lifetime
>>> on mobile devices. Currently we have to rely on the respective distro
>>> or user to enable Runtime PM via sysfs (echo auto > power/control).
>>> Some devices work around this restriction by calling pm_runtime_allow
>>> in their probe routine, even though that's not recommended by
>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/power/pci.txt
>>>
>>> Disabling Runtime PM per default seems to be a big hammer, a quirk
>>> for affected devices / systems may had been better. And we still
>>> have the option to disable Runtime PM for selected devices via sysfs.
>>>
>>> So, to cut a long story short: Wouldn't it be time to remove this
>>> restriction?
>>
>> I don't know the history of this, but maybe Rafael or the others can
>> shed some light on it.
>
> The systems that had those problems 10 years ago would still have
> them, but I expect there to be more systems where runtime PM can be
> enabled by default for PCI devices without issues.
>
