On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 07:48:18AM +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > On 28.08.2019 07:40, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > > On 28.08.2019 01:35, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > >> On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 05:39:37PM +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > >>> Background of this extension is a problem with the r8169 network driver. > >>> Several combinations of board chipsets and network chip versions have > >>> problems if ASPM is enabled, therefore we have to disable ASPM per > >>> default. However especially on notebooks ASPM can provide significant > >>> power-saving, therefore we want to give users the option to enable > >>> ASPM. With the new sysfs attributes users can control which ASPM > >>> link-states are disabled. > >>> > >>> v2: > >>> - use a dedicated sysfs attribute per link state > >>> - allow separate control of ASPM and PCI PM L1 sub-states > >>> > >>> v3: > >>> - patch 3: statically allocate the attribute group > >>> - patch 3: replace snprintf with printf > >>> - add patch 4 > >>> > >>> v4: > >>> - patch 3: add call to sysfs_update_group because is_visible callback > >>> returns false always at file creation time > >>> - patch 3: simplify code a little > >>> > >>> Heiner Kallweit (4): > >>> PCI/ASPM: add L1 sub-state support to pci_disable_link_state > >>> PCI/ASPM: allow to re-enable Clock PM > >>> PCI/ASPM: add sysfs attributes for controlling ASPM link states > >>> PCI/ASPM: remove Kconfig option PCIEASPM_DEBUG and related code > >>> > >>> Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-pci | 13 ++ > >>> drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 10 +- > >>> drivers/pci/pci.h | 12 +- > >>> drivers/pci/pcie/Kconfig | 7 - > >>> drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c | 236 ++++++++++++++++-------- > >>> include/linux/pci-aspm.h | 10 +- > >>> 6 files changed, 195 insertions(+), 93 deletions(-) > >> > >> I can fix this if you don't get to it, but this doesn't apply cleanly > >> to either my "master" branch (v5.3-rc1) or my "next" branch. I always > >> prefer series based on my "master" branch when possible. > >> > > I based it on top of linux-next, can rebase it to your master branch. That'd be great. linux-next is a moving target, so I never apply patches based directly on that. > Ah, one more point: > This series has a dependency on Mika Westerberg's > "PCI: Make pcie_downstream_port() available outside of access.c" > that is sitting in your inbox. How do you want to deal with this? Just mention the dependency in the cover letter and I'll take care of it. Thanks!
