Re: [PATCH] PCI: Blacklist power management of Gigabyte X299 DESIGNARE EX PCIe ports

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

 



On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 02:28:27PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 02:20:48PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > Gigabyte X299 DESIGNARE EX motherboard has one PCIe root port that is
> > connected to an Alpine Ridge Thunderbolt controller. This port has slot
> > implemented bit set in the config space but other than that it is not
> > hotplug capable in the sense we are expecting in Linux (it has
> > dev->is_hotplug_bridge set to 0):
> > 
> > 00:1c.4 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 200 Series PCH PCI Express Root Port #5
> >         Bus: primary=00, secondary=05, subordinate=46, sec-latency=0
> >         Memory behind bridge: 78000000-8fffffff [size=384M]
> >         Prefetchable memory behind bridge: 00003800f8000000-00003800ffffffff [size=128M]
> >         ...
> >         Capabilities: [40] Express (v2) Root Port (Slot+), MSI 00
> >         ...
> >                 SltCap: AttnBtn- PwrCtrl- MRL- AttnInd- PwrInd- HotPlug- Surprise-
> >                         Slot #8, PowerLimit 25.000W; Interlock- NoCompl+
> >                 SltCtl: Enable: AttnBtn- PwrFlt- MRL- PresDet- CmdCplt- HPIrq- LinkChg-
> >                         Control: AttnInd Unknown, PwrInd Unknown, Power- Interlock-
> >                 SltSta: Status: AttnBtn- PowerFlt- MRL- CmdCplt- PresDet- Interlock-
> >                         Changed: MRL- PresDet+ LinkState+
> > 
> > This system is using ACPI based hotplug to notify the OS that it needs
> > to rescan the PCI bus (ACPI hotplug).
> > 
> > If there is nothing connected in any of the Thunderbolt ports the root
> > port will not have any runtime PM active children and is thus
> > automatically runtime suspended pretty soon after boot by PCI PM core.
> > Now, when a device is connected the BIOS SMI handler responsible for
> > enumerating newly added devices is not able to find anything because the
> > port is in D3.
> 
> Ugh.  I don't see how this is a maintainable solution.  Are we going
> to have to just update this blacklist empirically as we get reports of
> systems that are "broken"?

I was hoping not but for that we would need to have some means to
identify these. What you suggest below might be one way to avoid adding
the blacklist.

> I say "broken" because I don't think we can point to anything here
> that doesn't conform to the specs, so maybe we tripped over something
> that *should* be covered in the spec, or maybe we're just not
> interpreting something correctly.

That is indeed possible.

> For example, it looks like PCI_EXP_FLAGS_SLOT is set, but Linux
> basically ignores it.  Maybe if PCI_EXP_FLAGS_SLOT is set but we
> aren't using pciehp, we should assume any hotplug would be handled via
> acpiphp?  And in that case, we should avoid doing anything that would
> prevent platform firmware from enumerating things below the bridge?

I don't see why that would not work. This could cause "power regression"
on some systems but I think that's better than systems that do not work
at all.

> > Prevent this from happening by blacklisting PCI power management of this
> > particular Gigabyte system.
> > 
> > Reported-by: Kedar A Dongre <kedar.a.dongre@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Is there a bugzilla or any other URL we could include here to help with
> future changes in this area?

No, this was reported internally.

I can file one if you think it is helpful.



[Index of Archives]     [DMA Engine]     [Linux Coverity]     [Linux USB]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Greybus]

  Powered by Linux