On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 9:53 PM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 04:46:14PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 1:34 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 11:57 PM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 07:38:51PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > If one of the PCIe root ports on Elo i2 is put into D3cold and then > > > > > back into D0, the downstream device becomes permanently inaccessible, > > > > > so add a bridge D3 DMI quirk for that system. > > > > > > > > > > This was exposed by commit 14858dcc3b35 ("PCI: Use > > > > > pci_update_current_state() in pci_enable_device_flags()"), but before > > > > > that commit the root port in question had never been put into D3cold > > > > > for real due to a mismatch between its power state retrieved from the > > > > > PCI_PM_CTRL register (which was accessible even though the platform > > > > > firmware indicated that the port was in D3cold) and the state of an > > > > > ACPI power resource involved in its power management. > > > > > > > > In the bug report you suspect a firmware issue. Any idea what that > > > > might be? It looks like a Gemini Lake Root Port, so I wouldn't think > > > > it would be a hardware issue. > > > > > > The _ON method of the ACPI power resource associated with the root > > > port doesn't work correctly. > > > > > > > Weird how things come in clumps. Was just looking at Mario's patch, > > > > which also has to do with bridges and D3. > > > > > > > > Do we need a Fixes line? E.g., > > > > > > > > Fixes: 14858dcc3b35 ("PCI: Use pci_update_current_state() in pci_enable_device_flags()") > > > > > > Strictly speaking, it is not a fix for the above commit. > > > > > > It is a workaround for a firmware issue uncovered by it which wasn't > > > visible, because power management was not used correctly on the > > > affected system because of another firmware problem addressed by > > > 14858dcc3b35. It wouldn't have worked anyway had it been attempted > > > AFAICS. > > > > > > I was thinking about CCing this change to -stable instead. > > Makes sense, thanks. > > > > > > BugLink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215715 > > > > > Reported-by: Stefan Gottwald <gottwald@xxxxxxxx> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > --- > > > > > drivers/pci/pci.c | 10 ++++++++++ > > > > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > Index: linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci.c > > > > > =================================================================== > > > > > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/pci/pci.c > > > > > +++ linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci.c > > > > > @@ -2920,6 +2920,16 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id bridge > > > > > DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_VENDOR, "Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd."), > > > > > DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "X299 DESIGNARE EX-CF"), > > > > > }, > > > > > + /* > > > > > + * Downstream device is not accessible after putting a root port > > > > > + * into D3cold and back into D0 on Elo i2. > > > > > + */ > > > > > + .ident = "Elo i2", > > > > > + .matches = { > > > > > + DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Elo Touch Solutions"), > > > > > + DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "Elo i2"), > > > > > + DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_VERSION, "RevB"), > > > > > + }, > > > > > > > > Is this bridge_d3_blacklist[] similar to the PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_D3 bit? > > > > > > Not really. The former applies to the entire platform and not to an > > > individual device. > > > > > > > Could they be folded together? We have a lot of bits that seem > > > > similar but maybe not exactly the same (dev->bridge_d3, > > > > dev->no_d3cold, dev->d3cold_allowed, dev->runtime_d3cold, > > > > PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_D3, pci_bridge_d3_force, etc.) Ugh. > > > > > > Yes, I agree that this needs to be cleaned up. > > > > > > > bridge_d3_blacklist[] itself was added by 85b0cae89d52 ("PCI: > > > > Blacklist power management of Gigabyte X299 DESIGNARE EX PCIe ports"), > > > > which honestly looks kind of random, i.e., it doesn't seem to be > > > > working around a hardware or even a firmware defect. > > > > > > > > Apparently the X299 issue is that 00:1c.4 is connected to a > > > > Thunderbolt controller, and the BIOS keeps the Thunderbolt controller > > > > powered off unless something is attached to it? At least, 00:1c.4 > > > > leads to bus 05, and in the dmesg log attached to [1] shows no devices > > > > on bus 05. > > > > > > > > It also says the platform doesn't support PCIe native hotplug, which > > > > matches what Mika said about it using ACPI hotplug. If a system is > > > > using ACPI hotplug, it seems like maybe *that* should prevent us from > > > > putting things in D3cold? How can we know whether ACPI hotplug > > > > depends on a certain power state? > > > > > > We have this check in pci_bridge_d3_possible(): > > > > > > if (bridge->is_hotplug_bridge && !pciehp_is_native(bridge)) > > > return false; > > > > > > but this only applies to the case when the particular bridge itself is > > > a hotplug one using ACPI hotplug. > > > > > > If ACPI hotplug is used, it generally is unsafe to put PCIe ports into > > > D3cold, because in that case it is unclear what the platform > > > firmware's assumptions regarding control of the config space are. > > > > > > However, I'm not sure how this is related to the patch at hand. > > > > So I'm not sure how you want to proceed here. > > > > The platform is quirky, so the quirk for it will need to be added this > > way or another. The $subject patch adds it using the existing > > mechanism, which is the least intrusive way. > > > > You seem to be thinking that the existing mechanism may not be > > adequate, but I'm not sure for what reason and anyway I think that it > > can be adjusted after adding the quirk. > > > > Please let me know what you think. > > I don't understand all that's going on here, but I applied it to > pci/pm for v5.19, thanks! Thank you! I've started to work on cleaning up the D3cold-related code.