On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Mika Westerberg mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 07:47:39PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
if (pcie_port_runtime_suspend_allowed(dev))
if (pcie_port_runtime_suspend_allowed(dev)) {pm_runtime_allow(&dev->dev);PCI drivers typically have left this decision up to the userspace. I'm wondering whether it is good idea to deviate from that here? Of course this allows immediate power savings but could potentially cause problems as well.
No distro has ever shipped userspace to do this, I really think this is a bad design. We have wasted countless watts of power on this stupid idea that people will run powertop, only a few people in the world run powertop, lots of people use Linux.
That is a fair point.
I do not have anything against calling pm_runtime_allow() here. In fact we already do the same in Intel LPSS drivers. I just wanted to bring that up.
Rafael, what do you think?
We can do that to start with. If there are no problems in the field with it, I don't see any problems in principle.
If we anyway are going to add cut-off date to enable runtime PM we should expect that the hardware is also capable of doing so (and if not we can always blacklist the exceptions).
Sounds reasonable.
The kernel should power stuff down not wait for the user to run powertop, At least for the GPU it's in the area of 8W of power, and I've got the GPU drivers doing this themselves,
I could have the GPU driver call runtime allow for it's host bridge I suppose, if we insist on the userspace cares, but I'd prefer not doing so.
I think we need to add corresponding call to pm_runtime_forbid() in pcie_portdrv_remove().
Yes most likely.
BTW, I can add both calls to the next version of PCIe runtime PM patches if you are OK with that, and all agree this is a good idea.
That would be fine by me.
Thanks, Rafael