linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: Add sleep quirk for Samsung 990 Evo

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]

Message-ID: <ZgwtYpbcyM_ffjaF@kbusch-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2024 10:08:02 -0600
From: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
To: Georg Gottleuber <g.gottleuber@...edocomputers.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	Werner Sembach <wse@...edocomputers.com>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
	Georg Gottleuber <ggo@...edocomputers.com>,
	linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: Add sleep quirk for Samsung 990 Evo

On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 05:13:48PM +0200, Georg Gottleuber wrote:
> Am 02.04.24 um 15:16 schrieb Christoph Hellwig:
> > On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 02:09:22PM +0100, Werner Sembach wrote:
> > > From: Georg Gottleuber <ggo@...edocomputers.com>
> > > 
> > > On some TUXEDO platforms, a Samsung 990 Evo NVMe leads to a high
> > > power consumption in s2idle sleep (2-3 watts).
> > > 
> > > This patch applies 'Force No Simple Suspend' quirk to achieve a
> > > sleep with a lower power consumption, typically around 0.5 watts.
> > 
> > Does this only apply to a specific SSD or all SSDs on this platform?
> > How do these platforms even get into the conditional?  Probably
> > through acpi_storage_d3 setting, which probably is set incorrectly
> > for the platform?  Any chance to just fix that?
> 
> Yes, this only apply to a specific SSD. I tested these SSDs (on
> PH4PRX1_PH6PRX1):
> * Kingston NV1, SNVS250G
> * Samsung 980, MZ-V8V500
> * Samsung 970 Evo, S46DNX0K900454D
> * Samsung 980 Pro, S69ENX0T709932L
> 
> S2idle consumes around 0.4 watts with these SSDs. But with a Samsung 990 Evo
> s2idle on this platform consumes 3.7 to 4.4 watts (6.8 vs 6.5 kernel).

For all these different SSDs you tested in this platform, do you see the
"platform quirk: setting simple suspend" in the dmesg? I just want to
confirm if the platform is changing the reported acpi_storage_d3 value
for different SSD models or if they're all the same.