[PATCH v2 0/2][SRU]{OEM-B]SATA device is not going to DEVSLP

[Kai-Heng Feng]

Hi,

> On 2018Jul23, at 10:47, AceLan Kao <acelan.kao at canonical.com> wrote:
> 
> From the log I got from DVT2 machine, the disk is in off state during
> short/long idle.
> These 2 commits are not crucial and the power consumption looks pretty
> good on DVT2 machine.
> 
> We got some margin pass number on DVT1 machine, and PM feels safer to
> have these commits in the kernel.
> We can wait and see and do more tests on DVT2 machines to see if we
> really need the patches.

FWIW, here’s the non-RFC patch set:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/19/992

We can add Tested-by tag if we have machines to verify.

Kai-Heng

> 
> 2018-07-20 2:15 GMT+08:00 Anthony Wong <anthony.wong at canonical.com>:
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 09:26:30AM +0800, AceLan Kao wrote:
>>> BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1781533
>>> 
>>> [Impact]
>>> Any of the platforms we’ve been seeing SATA problems not going to deepest
>>> state leading to other devices not getting there during long idle or
>>> s2idle. And it also prevents the system from entering deeper PC state
>>> other than PC3.
>>> 
>>> [Test]
>>> Verified the power consumption on some new platforms, it doesn't do too
>>> much difference to the numbers, but it improves.
>>> 
>>> [Fix]
>>> Suggested from Intel and Dell to contains the 2 commits
>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10502285/
>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10502287/
>>> 
>>> [Regression Potential]
>>> Low, the production machines with suspend-to-idle enabled should have the
>>> DEVSLP function been validated.
>>> 
>>> [Misc]
>>> Those commits do not show up in any public git tree yet, so let's verify
>>> them in oem kernel first, and then will submit to bionic kernel later.
>>> 
>>> Srinivas Pandruvada (2):
>>>  UBUNTU: SAUCE: ata: libahci: Correct setting of DEVSLP register
>>>  UBUNTU: SAUCE: ata: libahci: Allow reconfigure of DEVSLP register
>>> 
>>> drivers/ata/libahci.c | 20 ++++++++++++--------
>>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>> 
>> I am not totally against these patches but given upstream has not
>> acked the patches makes me feel uneasy to even accept them in
>> linux-oem.
>> 
>> On verification, do we have any machines that show the problem that SATA
>> devices fail to enter DEVSLP?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Anthony
> 
> -- 
> kernel-team mailing list
> kernel-team at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team