Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] PCI: Don't put non-power manageable PCIe root ports into D3

[Limonciello, Mario]

On 7/14/2023 2:17 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > Generally speaking, pci_bridge_d3_possible() is there to prevent
> > > bridges (and PCIe ports in particular) from being put into D3hot/cold
> > > if there are reasons to believe that it may not work.
> > > acpi_pci_bridge_d3() is part of that.
> > >
> > > Even if it returns 'true', the _SxD/_SxW check should still be applied
> > > via pci_target_state() to determine whether or not the firmware allows
> > > this particular bridge to go into D3hot/cold.  So arguably, the _SxW
> > > check in acpi_pci_bridge_d3() should not be necessary and if it makes
> > > any functional difference, there is a bug somewhere else.
> > But only if it was power manageable would the _SxD/_SxW check be
> > applied.  This issue is around the branch of pci_target_state() where
> > it's not power manageable and so it uses PME or it falls back to D3hot.
> Well, this looks like a spec interpretation difference.
>
> We thought that _SxD/_SxW would only be relevant for devices with ACPI
> PM support, but the firmware people seem to think that those objects
> are also relevant for PCI devices that don't have ACPI PM support
> (because those devices are still power-manageable via PMCSR).  If
> Windows agrees with that viewpoint, we'll need to adjust, but not
> through adding _SxW checks in random places.
I think that depends upon how you want to handle the lack of _S0W.

On these problematic devices there is no _S0W under the PCIe
root port.  As I said; Windows puts them into D0 in this case though.

So acpi_dev_power_state_for_wake should return ACPI_STATE_UNKNOWN.

Can you suggest where you think adding a acpi_dev_power_state_for_wake() 
does make sense?

Two areas that I think would work would be in: pci_pm_suspend_noirq() 
(to avoid calling pci_prepare_to_sleep)

or

directly in pci_prepare_to_sleep() to check that value in lieu of 
pci_target_state().