On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 08:59:35PM +0530, Basavaraj Natikar wrote: > > On 12/4/2023 8:36 PM, Mathias Nyman wrote: > > On 4.12.2023 16.49, Basavaraj Natikar wrote: > >> > >> On 12/4/2023 7:52 PM, Mathias Nyman wrote: > >>> On 4.12.2023 12.49, Basavaraj Natikar wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 12/4/2023 3:38 PM, Mathias Nyman wrote: > >>>>> This reverts commit a5d6264b638efeca35eff72177fd28d149e0764b. > >>>>> > >>>>> This patch was an attempt to solve issues seen when enabling > >>>>> runtime PM > >>>>> as default for all AMD 1.1 xHC hosts. see commit 4baf12181509 > >>>>> ("xhci: Loosen RPM as default policy to cover for AMD xHC 1.1") > >>>> > >>>> AFAK, only 4baf12181509 commit has regression on AMD xHc 1.1 below is > >>>> not regression > >>>> patch and its unrelated to AMD xHC 1.1. > >>>> > >>>> Only [PATCH 2/2] Revert "xhci: Loosen RPM as default policy to cover > >>>> for AMD xHC 1.1" > >>>> alone in this series solves regression issues. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Patch a5d6264b638e ("xhci: Enable RPM on controllers that support > >>> low-power states") > >>> was originally not supposed to go to stable. It was added later as it > >>> solved some > >>> cases triggered by 4baf12181509 ("xhci: Loosen RPM as default policy > >>> to cover for AMD xHC 1.1") > >>> see: > >>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/5993222.lOV4Wx5bFT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > >>> > >>> Turns out it wasn't enough. > >>> > >>> If we now revert 4baf12181509 "xhci: Loosen RPM as default policy to > >>> cover for AMD xHC 1.1" > >>> I still think it makes sense to also revert a5d6264b638e. > >>> Especially from the stable kernels. > >> > >> Yes , a5d6264b638e still solves other issues if underlying hardware > >> doesn't support RPM > >> if we revert a5d6264b638e on stable releases then new issues (not > >> related to regression) > >> other than AMD xHC 1.1 controllers including xHC 1.2 will still exist > >> on stable releases. > > > > Ok, got it, so a5d6264b638e also solves other issues than those > > exposed by 4baf12181509. > > And that one (a5d6264b638) should originally have been marked for stable. > > > > So only revert 4baf12181509, PATCH 2/2 in this series > > Thank you, that is correct. So just take patch 2/2 here, or will someone be sending me a new patch? thanks, greg k-h