Re: Linux 3.2.5
From: Matthew Garrett
Date: Tue Feb 07 2012 - 11:41:05 EST
On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 08:29:32AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Resulting in a broken system - aspm on the device, but not the bridge
> leading up to it. Which I do not think is a correct situation.
Per spec, it's valid. If there's a bridge that can't deal with its
downstreams having ASPM enabled when it has ASPM disabled then we
probably need to quirk that specially.
> (It's also broken because it fundamentally makes the aspm disable be
> "per device", which seems totally wrong - aspm is a system issue, you
> can't just willy-nilly randomly enable it for one device without
> taking other devices into account).
It's at *least* a per-bus thing, not a per-system thing. And, by the
spec, it's completely valid to have a different set of states configured
on the bridge and any downstream devices.
> So I suspect the whole pcie_aspm_sanity_check() function should go away.
The sanity check is important because nobody tests ASPM with pre-1.1
devices. However, in the aspm-is-disabled-by-FADT case, I can believe
that we should skip it.
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/