linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: Allow PCI bus-level PM to be used if ASPM is disabled

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 8 Aug 2019 10:48:04 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:     linux-nvme <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>,
        Mario Limonciello <Mario.Limonciello@...l.com>,
        Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>,
        Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rajat Jain <rajatja@...gle.com>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: Allow PCI bus-level PM to be used if ASPM is
 disabled

> -     ndev->last_ps = 0;
>       ret = nvme_get_power_state(ctrl, &ndev->last_ps);
> -     if (ret < 0)
> +     if (ret < 0 || ndev->last_ps == U32_MAX)

Is the intent of the magic U32_MAX check to see if the
nvme_get_power_state failed at the nvme level?  In that case just
checking for any non-zero return value from nvme_get_power_state might
be the easier and more clear way to do it.

> Index: linux-pm/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c

Shouldn't we split PCI vs nvme in two patches?

> @@ -1170,6 +1170,26 @@ static int pcie_aspm_get_policy(char *bu
>  module_param_call(policy, pcie_aspm_set_policy, pcie_aspm_get_policy,
>  	NULL, 0644);
>  
> +/*
> + * pcie_aspm_enabled - Return the mask of enabled ASPM link states.
> + * @pci_device: Target device.
> + */
> +u32 pcie_aspm_enabled(struct pci_dev *pci_device)

pcie_aspm_enabled sounds like it returns a boolean.  Shouldn't there be
a mask or so in the name better documenting what it returns?

> +{
> +	struct pci_dev *bridge = pci_upstream_bridge(pci_device);
> +	u32 ret;
> +
> +	if (!bridge)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&aspm_lock);
> +	ret = bridge->link_state ? bridge->link_state->aspm_enabled : 0;
> +	mutex_unlock(&aspm_lock);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}

I think this will need a EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL thrown in so that modular
nvme continues working.

> +
> +
>  #ifdef CONFIG_PCIEASPM_DEBUG

Nit: double blank line here.