lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ACPI: evaluate _PS3 when entering D3 Cold
Date
On Sunday, April 01, 2012, Zhang Rui wrote:
> On 日, 2012-04-01 at 09:23 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Sorry for the delayed response, I've been travelling recently.
> >
> > On Sunday, April 01, 2012, Lin Ming wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2012-04-01 at 13:56 +0800, Aaron Lu wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 01:27:33PM +0800, Lin Ming wrote:
> > > > > > - if (device->power.states[state].flags.explicit_set) {
> > > > > > + /* If state is D3 Cold, try to evaluate _PS3 first */
> > > > > > + if (state == ACPI_STATE_D3_COLD) {
> > > > > > + explicit_set = (ps - 1)->flags.explicit_set;
> > > > > > + object_name[3] -= 1;
> > > > > > + }
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not sure whether this works or not.
> > > > >
> > > > > From ACPI spec,
> > > > >
> > > > > _PS3 "is used to put the specific device into its D3hot or D3 state"
> > > > >
> > > > > D3 neither means D3hot nor D3cold. It's an old term before D3hot and
> > > > > D3cold were introduced.
> > > > I guess D3 has to mean something, right? :-)
> >
> > Well, not necessarily.
> >
> > The problem is what state the _PS3 method puts the device into: D3_hot or
> > D3_cold.
> >
> > Unfortunately, as far as I can say, ACPI 4.0 didn't specify any "official"
> > mapping between the "old" D3 and the "new" D3_{hod|cold} states, so we need to
> > figure out something. In my opinion, the only reasonable approach is to
> > assume that the state _PS3 puts the device into is always D3_cold, becuase
> > _PS3 may remove power completely from the device. It may not do that, but
> > we _must_ assume it does that in general.
> >
> There is a problem that I can think of.
> Say currently, ACPI always returns D3 when _PS3 exists.

I'm not sure what you mean exactly, but please see below.

> And this "ACPI_STATE_D3" is translated to PCI_D3hot.
> But with this approach, we're going to put these devices to PCI_D3cold
> instead, right?
> I'm not against this approach, but this may affect a lot of PCI devices,
> which we need to take care of, no?

Do you mean acpi_pm_device_sleep_state() should be modified? It doesn't
refer to whether or not _PS3 exists, as far as I can say.

In the acpi_pci_set_power_state() code path, on the other hand, there are
two potentially problematic situations when PCI wants to put the device into
PCI_D3hot (which need not map 1:1 onto ACPI D3_hot), one of which is when _PS3
is present, and the other is when neither _PS3, nor _PR3 is present.

If _PS3 is present, then _PR3 may or may not be present. In the latter case
we can only execute _PS3 in the hope it does the right thing, but as long
as we restore the device's configuration registers while resuming it (which is
done by all of our PCI device resume callback routines as far as I can say),
the only possible difference is the resume latency (which may be greater if
power is removed from the device entirely). However, in that case we shouldn't
turn off the device's power resources after _PS3 has been executed (if we
turned them off, power would be removed from the device, which wouldn't be
what PCI wanted). So, to handle this particular case we need to pass
ACPI_STATE_D3_HOT to acpi_bus_set_power(), meaning "avoid going into D3_cold,
if possible".

In both _PS3 and _PR3 are present, we should evaluate _PS3 and then turn off
the power resources listed as "off" by _PR3 (and turn on the power resoruces
listed by it as "on"), but we need to restore the configuration registers of
the device while resuming it. I think this is handled correctly without
modifications.

If neither _PS3 nor _PR3 is present, we shouldn't turn off the device's
power resources, because PCI doesn't want power to be removed from the device.

In summary, if PCI wants the device to be put into PCI_D3hot and _PS3 is
present, we should evaluate _PS3. However, we shouldn't turn the device's
power resources off unless _PR3 is present, in which case we can turn off
the power resources listed by it as "off".

Thanks,
Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-01 10:47    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans