On 2020/6/1 23:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Monday, June 1, 2020 5:14:45 PM CEST Sinan Kaya wrote: >> On 5/28/2020 7:42 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c >>>> index ac8ad6c..5140b26 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c >>>> @@ -456,7 +456,7 @@ static void negotiate_os_control(struct acpi_pci_root *root, int *no_aspm, >>>> >>>> dev_info(&device->dev, "_OSC failed (%s)%s\n", >>>> acpi_format_exception(status), >>>> - pcie_aspm_support_enabled() ? "; disabling ASPM" : ""); >>>> + pcie_aspm_support_enabled() ? "" : "; disabling ASPM"); >>>> return; >>>> } >>>> >>>> -- >>> Applied as 5.8 material under the "ACPI: PCI: Fix the ASPM part of the >>> _OSC failure message" subject and with a different changelog. >> >> I'm confused. The original change would print ASPM is getting disabled >> only when ASPM is supported. Now, we are printing disabling ASPM when >> ASPM is not supported. >> >> Now, we reverted the change and went back to incorrect behavior again. >> >> Am I missing something? > Well, it turns out that I was confused, as well as the author of the patch. > > Dropped now, thanks for the heads-up! well, Sinan's words make sense to me. But I'm still confused that, the message says we're "disabling ASPM" but ASPM maybe enabled if we designate pcie_aspm=force as I mentioned in the commit message. Will it be possible if we replace "disabling" to "disabled" or we can do something else to make the message reflect the real status of ASPM? Thanks, Yicong > > > > . >
