On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 12:57:09PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> +Rafael
>
> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 01:10:37PM +0200, Peter Wu wrote:
> > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 04:55:35PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 12:53:01AM +0200, Peter Wu wrote:
> > > > Since "PCI: Add runtime PM support for PCIe ports", the parent PCIe port
> > > > can be runtime-suspended which disables power resources via ACPI. This
> > > > is incompatible with DSM, resulting in a GPU device which is still in D3
> > > > and locks up the kernel on resume.
> > > >
> > > > Mirror the behavior of Windows 8 and newer[1] (as observed via an AMLi
> > > > debugger trace) and stop using the DSM functions for D3cold when power
> > > > resources are available on the parent PCIe port.
> > > >
> > > > [1]:
> > > > https://msdn.microsoft.com/windows/hardware/drivers/bringup/firmware-requirements-for-d3cold
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Wu <peter at lekensteyn.nl>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c | 34
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > > > 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
> > > > index df9f73e..e469df7 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
> > > > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ static struct nouveau_dsm_priv {
> > > > bool dsm_detected;
> > > > bool optimus_detected;
> > > > bool optimus_flags_detected;
> > > > + bool optimus_skip_dsm;
> > > > acpi_handle dhandle;
> > > > acpi_handle rom_handle;
> > > > } nouveau_dsm_priv;
> > > > @@ -212,8 +213,26 @@ static const struct vga_switcheroo_handler
> > > > nouveau_dsm_handler = {
> > > > .get_client_id = nouveau_dsm_get_client_id,
> > > > };
> > > >
> > > > +/* Firmware supporting Windows 8 or later do not use _DSM to put the
> > > > device into
> > > > + * D3cold, they instead rely on disabling power resources on the
> > > > parent. */
> > > > +static bool nouveau_pr3_present(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> > > > +{
> > > > + struct pci_dev *parent_pdev = pci_upstream_bridge(pdev);
> > > > + struct acpi_device *ad;
> > >
> > > Nit: please call this adev instead of ad.
> >
> > Will do.
> >
> > > > +
> > > > + if (!parent_pdev)
> > > > + return false;
> > > > +
> > > > + ad = ACPI_COMPANION(&parent_pdev->dev);
> > > > + if (!ad)
> > > > + return false;
> > > > +
> > > > + return ad->power.flags.power_resources;
> > >
> > > Is this sufficient to tell if the parent device has _PR3? I thought it
> > > returns true if it has power resources in general, not necessarily _PR3.
> > >
> > > Otherwise this looks okay to me.
> >
> > It is indeed set whenever there is any _PRx method. I wonder if it is
> > appropriate to access fields directly like this, perhaps this would be
> > more accurate (based on device_pm.c):
> >
> > /* Check whether the _PR3 method is available. */
> > return adev->power.states[ACPI_STATE_D3_COLD].flags.valid;
> >
> > I am also considering adding a check in case the pcieport driver does
> > not support D3cold via runtime PM, what do you think of this?
> >
> > if (!parent_pdev)
> > return false;
> > /* If the PCIe port does not support D3cold via runtime PM, allow a
> > * fallback to the Optimus DSM method to put the device in D3cold. */
> > if (parent_pdev->no_d3cold)
> > return false;
> >
> > This is needed to avoid the regression reported in the cover letter, but
> > also allows pre-2015 systems to (still) have the D3cold possibility.
>
> The _DSM method with 0 as index parameter should return a bit field
> telling which functions are supported. Sane BIOS disables that
> particular function if it detects Windows 8 and newer. Have you checked
> if that's the case?
>
> Then you can call _DSM only if it is supported and otherwise expect the
> parent device's power resources to turn off power when runtime
> suspended.
The _DSM methods (for the Nvidia device) are often still included and
functions are reported as supported. I guess that vendors just check
whether it is working and do not bother removing legacy functions. The
Acer case below seems exceptional.
I suggested the no_d3cold check such that DSM can still be called even
though the runtime PM on the PCIe port does nothing.
> > Out of curiosity I looked up an pre-2015 laptop (found Acer V5-573G,
> > apparently from November 2013, Windows 8.1) and extracted the ACPI
> > tables from the BIOS images. BIOS 2.28 (2014/05/13) introduces support
> > for power resources on the parent devicea(\_SB.PCI0.PEG0._PR3 and a
> > related NVP3 device) when _OSI("Windows 2013") is true. (This is added
> > as alternative for the old DSM interface.)
> >
> > Maybe 2014 is also an appropriate cutoff date? I wonder if it is
> > feasible to detect firmware use of _OSI("Windows 2013") and use that
> > instead of the BIOS year.
>
> Using BIOS year works even if there is no ACPI available.
I thought that you need support from ACPI to put a device in D3cold?
> What comes to the cutoff date, I discussed with Rafael and it was
> decided that we use the same year Windows 10 was released to be on the
> safe side. Reading the links you provided here:
>
> https://msdn.microsoft.com/fi-fi/windows/hardware/drivers/bringup/device-power-management
> https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/hh967709(v=vs.85).aspx
>
> it seems that from Windows 8 they started transitioning devices into
> D3cold during runtime as well.
My impression from the ACPI tables I have seen so far is that power
resources support is enabled for Windows 2012 (Win8) or newer.
--
Kind regards,
Peter Wu
https://lekensteyn.nl
