[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2fbc0d1b-0d14-6bab-74c5-a9dd2ae417bb@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 09:08:18 -0700
From: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...nel.org>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc: Rajat Jain <rajatja@...gle.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
Vidya Sagar <vidyas@...dia.com>,
Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>,
Frederick Lawler <fred@...dlawl.com>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mayurkumar.patel@...el.com, rajatxjain@...il.com,
Richard Hughes <rhughes@...hat.com>,
Carlos Garnacho <cgarnach@...hat.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Pali Rohar <pali.rohar@...il.com>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] pci/aspm: Remove CONFIG_PCIEASPM_DEBUG
On 7/30/2018 7:14 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> However, the end of sec 5.4.1 does make it clear that the functions
> need not have the same ASPM configuration, and it gives rules for how
> those different settings should affect the shared link. Since it
> mentions different ASPM Control fields for the different functions, I
> assume the policy combining those per-function settings into the
> single link behavior must be implemented in the hardware.
Very interesting. This is news for me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists