lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jul]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] thunderbolt: icm: Ignore mailbox errors in icm_suspend()
Date
On Thursday, July 27, 2017 11:50:11 AM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 07:05:01PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 26, 2017 04:12:59 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 02:48:54PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, July 26, 2017 11:32:44 AM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 06:10:57PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 01:00:12 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 01:31:00AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On one of my test machines nhi_mailbox_cmd() called from icm_suspend()
> > > > > > > > times out and returnes an error which then is propagated to the
> > > > > > > > caller and causes the entire system suspend to be aborted which isn't
> > > > > > > > very useful.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Instead of aborting system suspend, print the error into the log
> > > > > > > > and continue.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree, it should not prevent suspend but I wonder why it fails in the
> > > > > > > first place? Can you check what is the return value?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As per the above, the error is a timeout, ie. -ETIMEDOUT.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ah, right I somehow missed that.
> > > > >
> > > > > Does it have Falcon Ridge controller or Alpine Ridge?
> > > >
> > > > I'll check later today, but i guess you'll know (see below).
> > >
> > > No need to check, it is Alpine Ridge (since it is Dell 9360).
> > >
> > > > > Just to make sure, can you increase the timeout in nhi_mailbox_cmd()
> > > > > to 1000ms or so. It should not take that long though but better to check.
> > > >
> > > > Well, I can do that, but I don't think it will help.
> > > >
> > > > It just looks like the chip is not responding at all at that point.
> > >
> > > I see.
> > >
> > > Then I think we should apply your patch now and we can investigate this
> > > further offline and hopefully find the root cause for the problem.
> > >
> > > For this patch:
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
> >
> > OK
> >
> > I guess I can apply it, then, or if anyone else in the CC wants to do that,
> > please let me know.
>
> Greg typically takes these but I'm fine either way.

OK, applied then.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-07-28 02:05    [W:0.082 / U:63.564 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site