Date:   Wed, 11 May 2022 14:02:08 -0700
From:   Tanjore Suresh <tansuresh@...gle.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvme <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] driver core: Support asynchronous driver shutdown

Greg

On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 12:13 PM Tanjore Suresh <tansuresh@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 12:52 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post
> > Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting?
> > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> > Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> > A: Top-posting.
> > Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
> >
> > A: No.
> > Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
> >
> > http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 11:03:07AM -0700, Tanjore Suresh wrote:
> > > Rafael,
> > >
> > > That is a good observation, however, many of the use cases in data
> > > centers (deployment of devices in data centers) do not exploit device
> > > power management. Therefore, I'm not sure that is the right way to
> > > design this.
> >
> > Yes it is, enable device power management and use that interface please.
> > Devices in data centers should of course be doing the same thing as
> > everyone else, as it actually saves real money in power costs.  To not
> > do so is very odd.
> >
>
> I guess we are intermixing the  terminology of device power management
> with shutdown.
> My second, third reasoning in my previous e-mail, thought it brings
> out that difference. Maybe not.
> I will try one more time, my thought process on this one.
>
> This patch is only for shutdown. The shutdown can be done in a system
> in various flavors,
> (this may include a power being pulled from the system components when
> all the devices
> are quiescent and it can also be soft shutdown, where power is not
> removed from the system, but system
> could be attempting a reboot)
>
> The device power management allows the device to bring down any
> devices that may be idle to various power states that
> device may support in a selective manner & based on the transition
> allowed by the device. Such a transition initiated by
> the system can be achieved using the 'dpm' interface for runtime power
> management (more for extending laptop battery life).
> It can also be exploited for system sleep models (suspend and resume -
> where state is preserved and restarted from where it left off
> --> More applicable for laptops/desktops). That does not mean data
> center devices cannot exploit, but they worry about slight latency
> variation in any
> I/O initiated to any device. Such power management could introduce
> more latency when it transitions from one state to another.
> Therefore, the use case is more apt for Laptops, in certain cases
> desktops in my opinion or understanding.
>
> The shutdown entry point has been traditionally different and the
> semantics is that the whole system is going down to a
> quiescent state and power may be pulled or may not be, IMO, i am
> seeing both are independent requirements, in my view.
> Let me know if I am mistaken. I am not sure why we should break the
> shutdown semantics as understood by driver developers and
> overload it with dpm requirements?
>

I have not seen additional comments, I request your help
in moving this further, please. If i have missed something,
Please let me know.

Thanks
sureshtk



> Thanks
> sureshtk
>
>
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h

Powered by blists - more mailing lists