On 08.07.2019 08:37, AceLan Kao wrote:
> We have many commits in the driver which enable and then disable ASPM
> function over and over again.
> commit b75bb8a5b755 ("r8169: disable ASPM again")
> commit 0866cd15029b ("r8169: enable ASPM on RTL8106E")
> commit 94235460f9ea ("r8169: Align ASPM/CLKREQ setting function with
> vendor driver")
> commit aa1e7d2c31ef ("r8169: enable ASPM on RTL8168E-VL")
> commit f37658da21aa ("r8169: align ASPM entry latency setting with vendor
> driver")
> commit a99790bf5c7f ("r8169: Reinstate ASPM Support")
> commit 671646c151d4 ("r8169: Don't disable ASPM in the driver")
> commit 4521e1a94279 ("Revert "r8169: enable internal ASPM and clock
> request settings".")
> commit d64ec841517a ("r8169: enable internal ASPM and clock request
> settings")
>
> This function is very important for production, and if we can't come out
> a solution to make both happy, I'd suggest we add a parameter in the
> driver to toggle it.
>
The usage of a module parameter to control ASPM is discouraged.
There have been more such attempts in the past that have been declined.
Pending with the PCI maintainers is a series adding ASPM control
via sysfs, see here: https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg83228.html
Also more details than just stating "it's important for production"
would have been appreciated in the commit message, e.g. which
power-savings you can achieve with ASPM on which systems.
