| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20200313113128.GB2540@lahna.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:31:28 +0200
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
"Shih-Yuan Lee (FourDollars)" <sylee@...onical.com>,
Tiffany <tiffany.wang@...onical.com>,
Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Thunderbolt, direct-complete and long suspend/resume time of
Suspend-to-idle
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 01:07:35PM +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
>
>
> > On Mar 12, 2020, at 18:41, Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 06:10:45PM +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Mar 12, 2020, at 16:15, Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 12:41:08PM +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Mar 11, 2020, at 18:38, Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 01:39:51PM +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am currently investigating long suspend and resume time of suspend-to-idle.
> >>>>>> It's because Thunderbolt bridges need to wait for 1100ms [1] for runtime-resume on system suspend, and also for system resume.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I made a quick hack to the USB driver and xHCI driver to support direct-complete, but I failed to do so for the parent PCIe bridge as it always disables the direct-complete [2], since device_may_wakeup() returns true for the device:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> /* Avoid direct_complete to let wakeup_path propagate. */
> >>>>>> if (device_may_wakeup(dev) || dev->power.wakeup_path)
> >>>>>> dev->power.direct_complete = false;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You need to be careful here because otherwise you end up situation where
> >>>>> the link is not properly trained and we tear down the whole tree of
> >>>>> devices which is worse than waiting bit more for resume.
> >>>>
> >>>> My idea is to direct-complete when there's no PCI or USB device
> >>>> plugged into the TBT, and use pm_reuqest_resume() in complete() so it
> >>>> won't block resume() or resume_noirq().
> >>>
> >>> Before doing that..
> >>>
> >>>>>> Once the direct-complete is disabled, system suspend/resume is used hence the delay in [1] is making the resume really slow.
> >>>>>> So how do we make suspend-to-idle faster? I have some ideas but I am not sure if they are feasible:
> >>>>>> - Make PM core know the runtime_suspend() already use the same wakeup as suspend(), so it doesn't need to use device_may_wakeup() check to determine direct-complete.
> >>>>>> - Remove the DPM_FLAG_NEVER_SKIP flag in pcieport driver, and use pm_request_resume() in its complete() callback to prevent blocking the resume process.
> >>>>>> - Reduce the 1100ms delay. Maybe someone knows the values used in macOS and Windows...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Which system this is? ICL?
> >>>>
> >>>> CML-H + Titan Ridge.
> >>>
> >>> .. we should really understand this better because CML-H PCH root ports
> >>> and Titan/Alpine Ridge downstream ports all support active link
> >>> reporting so instead of the 1000+100ms you should see something like
> >>> this:
> >>
> >> Root port for discrete graphics:
> >> # lspci -vvnn -s 00:01.0
> >> 00:01.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Xeon E3-1200 v5/E3-1500 v5/6th Gen Core Processor PCIe Controller (x16) [8086:1901] (rev 02) (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])
> >> Capabilities: [a0] Express (v2) Root Port (Slot+), MSI 00
> >> LnkCap: Port #2, Speed 8GT/s, Width x16, ASPM L0s L1, Exit Latency L0s <256ns, L1 <8us
> >> ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot+ ASPMOptComp+
> >> LnkCtl: ASPM L0s L1 Enabled; RCB 64 bytes Disabled- CommClk+
> >> ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt-
> >
> > Interesting, Titan Ridge is connected to the graphics slot, no? What
> > system this is?
>
> No, TBT connects to another port, which supports link active reporting.
> This is just to show not all CML-H ports support that.
Right.
> >> Thunderbolt ports:
> >> # lspci -vvvv -s 04:00
> >> 04:00.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation JHL7540 Thunderbolt 3 Bridge [Titan Ridge 2C 2018] [8086:15e7] (rev 06) (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])
> >> Capabilities: [c0] Express (v2) Downstream Port (Slot+), MSI 00
> >> LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x4, ASPM L1, Exit Latency L0s <64ns, L1 <1us
> >> ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot+ ASPMOptComp+
> >> LnkCtl: ASPM L1 Enabled; Disabled- CommClk+
> >> ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt-
> >
> > This one leads to the TBT NHI.
> >
> >> # lspci -vvnn -s 04:01
> >> 04:01.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation JHL7540 Thunderbolt 3 Bridge [Titan Ridge 2C 2018] [8086:15e7] (rev 06) (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])
> >> Capabilities: [c0] Express (v2) Downstream Port (Slot+), MSI 00
> >> LnkCap: Port #1, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x4, ASPM L1, Exit Latency L0s <64ns, L1 <1us
> >> ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep+ BwNot+ ASPMOptComp+
> >> LnkCtl: ASPM L1 Enabled; Disabled- CommClk-
> >> ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt-
> >
> > This one is one of the extension downstream ports and it supports active
> > link reporting.
> >
> >> # lspci -vvnn -s 04:02
> >> 04:02.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation JHL7540 Thunderbolt 3 Bridge [Titan Ridge 2C 2018] [8086:15e7] (rev 06) (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])
> >> Capabilities: [c0] Express (v2) Downstream Port (Slot+), MSI 00
> >> LnkCap: Port #2, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x4, ASPM L1, Exit Latency L0s <64ns, L1 <1us
> >> ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot+ ASPMOptComp+
> >> LnkCtl: ASPM L1 Enabled; Disabled- CommClk+
> >> ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt-
> >
> > This one leads to the xHCI.
> >
> >> So both CML-H PCH and TBT ports report "LLActRep-".
> >
> > So in pci_bridge_wait_for_secondary_bus() we only call
> > pcie_wait_for_link_delay() if the port supports speeds higher than 5
> > GT/s (gen2). Now if I read the above correct all the ports except the
> > root port support 2.5 GT/s (gen1) speeds so we should go to the
> > msleep(delay) branch and not call pcie_wait_for_link_delay() at all:
> >
> > if (pcie_get_speed_cap(dev) <= PCIE_SPEED_5_0GT) {
> > pci_dbg(dev, "waiting %d ms for downstream link\n", delay);
> > msleep(delay);
> > } else {
> > pci_dbg(dev, "waiting %d ms for downstream link, after activation\n",
> > delay);
> > if (!pcie_wait_for_link_delay(dev, true, delay)) {
> > /* Did not train, no need to wait any further */
> > return;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > Only explanation I have is that delay itself is set to 1000ms for some
> > reason. Can you check if that's the case and then maybe check where that
> > delay is coming from?
> >
> >>> 1. Wait for the link + 100ms for the root port
> >>> 2. Wait for the link + 100ms for the Titan Ridge downstream ports
> >>> (these are run paraller wrt all Titan Ridge downstream ports that have
> >>> something connected)
> >>>
> >>> If there is a TBT device connected then 2. is repeated for it and so on.
> >>>
> >>> So the 1000ms+ is really unexpected. Are you running mainline kernel and
> >>> if so, can you share dmesg with CONFIG_PCI_DEBUG=y so we can see the
> >>> delays there? Maybe also add some debugging to
> >>> pcie_wait_for_link_delay() where it checks for the
> >>> !pdev->link_active_reporting and waits for 1100ms.
> >>
> >> I added the debug log in another thread and it does reach !pdev->link_active_reporting.
> >
> > Hmm, based on the above that should not happen :-(
> >
> >> Let me see if patch link active reporting for the ports in PCI quirks can help.
> >
> > Let's first investigate bit more to understand what is going on.
> >
> > I suggest to create kernel.org bugzilla about this. Please include full
> > dmesg and 'sudo lspci -vv' output at least and of course the steps you
> > use to reproduce this.
>
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206837
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists