On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 09:57:45AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 07:47:05 -0700 > Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I think that the PCI "poll for PME" logic should just resume the > > device - and *not* suspend it again. Maybe it can suspend it next time > > around when it polls, if PME has been cleared. That should be (a) sane > > and (b) obviate any need for some random delay in some random driver. > > > > Jesse? > > > > That said, Matthew's suggestion sounds like a good idea regardless. > > Yeah that makes sense. But hopefully we can get away without polling > at all if we actually implement PME message interrupt support on the > host bridge side. Does anyone with affected hardware want to try that? > I think the publicly available docs have enough info to do it... Don't we already have that, assuming the hardware gives us control via _OSC? The problem we've seen is that a pile of hardware appears to set the PME flag without generating any interrupt, regardless of whether we're in ACPI or native delivery modes. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
