On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 12:03 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 11:14 AM Mika Westerberg > <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 10:36:31PM +0100, Karol Herbst wrote: > > > with the branch and patch applied: > > > https://gist.githubusercontent.com/karolherbst/03c4c8141b0fa292d781badfa186479e/raw/5c62640afbc57d6e69ea924c338bd2836e770d02/gistfile1.txt > > > > Thanks for testing. Too bad it did not help :( I suppose there is no > > change if you increase the delay to say 1s? > > Well, look at the original patch in this thread. > > What it does is to prevent the device (GPU in this particular case) > from going into a PCI low-power state before invoking AML to power it > down (the AML is still invoked after this patch AFAICS), so why would > that have anything to do with the delays? > > The only reason would be the AML running too early, but that doesn't > seem likely. IMO more likely is that the AML does something which > cannot be done to a device in a PCI low-power state. BTW, I'm wondering if anyone has tried to skip the AML instead of skipping the PCI PM in this case (as of 5.4-rc that would be a similar patch to skip the invocations of __pci_start/complete_power_transition() in pci_set_power_state() for the affected device).
