On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 05:35 -0700, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:08:48PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 01:10:31PM +0200, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > > > This patch series try to fix ath9k ASPM. Some of patches are cleanup > > > only or do merging common code (with e1000e driver). > > > > > > With CONFIG_PCIEASPM it's possible to change ASPM settings on runtime > > > via /sys/module/pcie_aspm/parameters/policy . However most drivers > > > I looked at assume this setting is constant. I add a callback to pci > > > driver to inform about the change, and allow driver to do needed hw > > > related changes. Currently only ath9k implement the callback, but > > > I think it will be useful for other drivers i.e. iwlwifi, rtlwifi > > > that do some own ASPM handling. > > > > > > Would be nice to get some testing on patches on different > > > platforms with ath9k devices on kernel compiled with CONFIG_PCIEASPM > > > (default) and mixing up commands: > > > > > > echo powersave > /sys/module/pcie_aspm/parameters/policy > > > echo performance > /sys/module/pcie_aspm/parameters/policy > > > ifconfig wlan0 down > > > ifconfig wlan0 up > > > pm-suspend > > > > > > Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Cc: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: e1000-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > --- > > > drivers/net/e1000e/netdev.c | 31 ---------- > > > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar9002_hw.c | 12 --- > > > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar9003_hw.c | 12 --- > > > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw-ops.h | 9 +- > > > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.c | 17 +++-- > > > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hw.h | 12 +-- > > > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c | 8 -- > > > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/pci.c | 88 ++++++++++++++++++++++------- > > > drivers/pci/pcie/Makefile | 3 > > > drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c | 46 ++++++++++++++- > > > include/linux/pci-aspm.h | 2 > > > include/linux/pci.h | 3 > > > 12 files changed, 148 insertions(+), 95 deletions(-) > > > > I'm happy to take patches 1-3 through my tree. But maybe patches 4-8 > > should go through a PCI tree? Or at least get some ACKS from the > > appropriate maintainers to take these changes through the wireless > > trees? > > Getting ACKs from Jesse and Jeff would be best since ath9k patches > 5 and 8 depends on 1-3. But, crap, seems my scripts does not eval Cc > from email body to actual Cc list. Not sure if pci and e1000 guys > saw these patches. If not, I'm gona repost this set and Cc it > fully to pci and e1000 guys. > > Stanislaw I did see the patches, sorry for not responding. I wanted Bruce Allan <bruce.w.allan@xxxxxxxxx> to review the e1000e changes to ensure he did not have any issues. To me the change looks fine based on the aspm changes.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
