From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F2A03611A for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:08:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712074086; cv=none; b=SGngSSjhPAOTgz1/8t8kMMSH9KmXVog6RIgnh3JcJLmCUFvE2ssEdOnfk2/2zGUtgCTRykiZVgcQev5dlfivfMepZ8QQA3lG41XkvWYVcSguQA1qeVedMgEpZ2PFNNWZuHzKGAo4JejMaR2URQACZ7RKsq79TfOy7aMaHUl7gJw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712074086; c=relaxed/simple; bh=v7GW57i9E9k0EfqiWo2KVoW23hWJbROx8FjWEao2q4E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=PdM/B1y5CoCgEB8uDYb10PkcGeg6lYGiIVDrU0GdlmsHissNpe3aUqtluoJyMCH9txT5H/L2VI2Ghx1OYw/hp0Vq17jF5WoQ4tHFZwN0o0MfIqYBXG7dOXZozW2tQkVnuX370itrwyJne87N75avT6/GvQA/EgqX/lz0Mdg2UtU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=IXVpxTBe; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="IXVpxTBe" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5D3F2C433C7; Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:08:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1712074085; bh=v7GW57i9E9k0EfqiWo2KVoW23hWJbROx8FjWEao2q4E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=IXVpxTBeREZDDlnPbDi7GFMTwk+Wyz5Iujn/4RO4km6aEiZO7T8fYxPac6iQmcY8U 60qK79cHg3kMF/Sx9IpO/u+y0UDZjc/NkHm3HhM+fsLFMGMMMImpctbsk8BqxV9lhF 8FboASrngFqQEADgtvPAHrBcfdsYL/TbQjLki6BcT8T9LKs7k0a+iHIEs2jpusg8x0 Y/MGL4T6zQwsXLqjo2fqlkfBao+Ym7+0epd1VsxGqHRXrcNivGJ8kKKdsKosWsB0eF APcBK/Uc8GBVfIZV528bwKfJuMAkceB6g1HP+kYtj6wCE5R+5YRTs8IRirut/3thRu flvSSe+lLBDqA== Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2024 10:08:02 -0600 From: Keith Busch To: Georg Gottleuber Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Werner Sembach , Jens Axboe , Sagi Grimberg , Georg Gottleuber , linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: Add sleep quirk for Samsung 990 Evo Message-ID: References: <20240328130923.61752-1-wse@tuxedocomputers.com> <20240402131658.GA31963@lst.de> <230e3f41-9f6b-42fd-a411-567abbaebbbe@tuxedocomputers.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <230e3f41-9f6b-42fd-a411-567abbaebbbe@tuxedocomputers.com> 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 > > > > > > 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.