From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
To: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] PCI: pciehp: Fix hotplug on Catlow Lake with unreliable PME status
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2026 10:37:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <074b0b65-b9fb-477e-b511-d09fb1915614@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c7a3ef34-27f0-4b0b-8eab-db0fff15588d@linux.intel.com>
Hi Lukas, Bjorn,
Gentle ping on the two options in my mail below. In the meantime I
validated both approaches on Catlow Lake with physical hot-remove and
hot-add, and both fix the issue.
Please let me know which one you prefer and I will send v5 with that
approach.
On 10/7/2026 12:55 PM, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote:
> Hi Lukas,
>
> On 9/25/2026 11:35 AM, Lukas Wunner wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2026 at 10:38:08AM -0700, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote:
>>> Once the port is in D3hot, pciehp has cleared HPIE and depends on PME.
>>> That is where Catlow breaks. The PME interrupt arrives, but PME Status in
>>> Root Status is never set. pcie_pme_irq() returns IRQ_NONE, the port stays
>>> in D3hot and the hot-add event is lost.
>>
>> If a device below the Root Port (instead of the Root Port itself)
>> signals PME, does the Root Port misbehave in the same way?
>> I.e. is the PME Status bit clear in that case as well?
>
> No, a downstream PME is reported correctly. I tested with a NIC at
> 0a:00.0 (8086:1533) connected below Root Port 00:1c.6 (8086:7a3e). The NIC
> and the Port were both runtime suspended to D3hot, and the NIC woke on link
> change. All six PMEs I captured had PME Status set and Requester ID 0x0a00,
> which matches the NIC's BDF, and went through the normal path in
> pcie_pme_handle_request().
>
>>
>> If so, the proper solution might be to add a quirk to the PME driver,
>> not the PCIe hotplug driver.
>
> Given the above, the problem is narrower than broken PME in general. It
> only affects the PME the Port generates for its own hotplug event, and
> hotplug is the only user of that. So both drivers are possible places for
> the fix, and I would like your and Bjorn's preference before sending v5.
>
> 1. pciehp route (v4)
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20260323223056.3119060-1-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com/
>
> A quirk sets PCI_DEV_FLAGS_PME_UNRELIABLE on the affected Ports, and
> pciehp_disable_interrupt() skips clearing HPIE for them. The Port
> still goes to D3hot, but hotplug events arrive as ordinary hotplug
> interrupts and PME is not needed. The downside is that it changes the
> suspend behaviour added by eb34da60edee, which was Bjorn's concern.
>
> 2. PME route
>
> Keep the same quirk flag, leave pciehp alone, and handle it in
> pcie_pme_irq(). If a quirked Port interrupts while not in D0 and PME
> Status is clear, resume the Port. pciehp_runtime_resume() then
> re-enables HPIE and pciehp_check_presence() finds the new card.
> Downstream PMEs still set PME Status and take the normal path, and
> pcie_pme_work_fn() is unchanged.
>
> if (PCI_POSSIBLE_ERROR(rtsta)) {
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&data->lock, flags);
> return IRQ_NONE;
> }
>
> if (!(rtsta & PCI_EXP_RTSTA_PME)) {
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&data->lock, flags);
>
> /*
> * Some Root Ports don't set PME Status for a PME they
> * generate for their own hotplug events. While the Port
> * is not in D0, PME is the only interrupt it can signal
> * for such events, so resume it and let pciehp pick up
> * the event.
> */
> if ((port->dev_flags & PCI_DEV_FLAGS_PME_UNRELIABLE) &&
> port->current_state != PCI_D0) {
> pci_wakeup_event(port);
> pm_request_resume(&port->dev);
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
> return IRQ_NONE;
> }
>
>>
>> pcie_pme_irq() checks PME Status and bails out if it's not set.
>> That would need an amendment such that Root Ports with broken PME
>> would always assume it's set if they receive a PME. I think that
>> would be safe because even though PME is shared with other interrupts
>> such as hotplug, I think it's the only interrupt source once the port
>> is in D3hot.
>>
>> There's another check for PME Status in pcie_pme_work_fn().
>> This one is tricky because it uses the PME Status bit to jump
>> out of the for-loop. Does the Root Port at least set the
>> Requester ID to an appropriate value? If so maybe that can be
>> used as an indicator whether the loop should be terminated.
>>
>> Or maybe the PME Pending bit can be used in lieu of PME Status?
>>
>
> In the failing case Requester ID stays 0000 and PME Pending is not set
> either, so neither can be used in place of PME Status. That is why option
> 2 resumes the Port directly from pcie_pme_irq() and does not go through
> pcie_pme_work_fn() at all.
>
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Lukas
>
--
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
Linux Kernel Developer
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-20 17:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-16 22:08 Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-03-23 12:53 ` Lukas Wunner
2026-03-23 23:24 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2026-03-24 21:45 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-03-24 23:46 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2026-03-25 5:56 ` Lukas Wunner
2026-03-25 23:21 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2026-03-25 6:11 ` Mika Westerberg
2026-03-25 21:12 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-03-26 6:12 ` Mika Westerberg
2026-03-26 21:23 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-03-27 11:16 ` Mika Westerberg
2026-04-03 19:37 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-04-07 7:08 ` Mika Westerberg
2026-09-11 17:01 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-09-24 18:46 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-09-25 5:19 ` Mika Westerberg
2026-09-25 17:38 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-09-25 18:35 ` Lukas Wunner
2026-09-29 17:42 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-10-07 19:55 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-10-20 17:37 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=074b0b65-b9fb-477e-b511-d09fb1915614@linux.intel.com \
--to=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®