Messages in this thread | | | From | Alexander Duyck <> | Date | Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:38:03 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] Improve s0ix flows for systems i219LM |
| |
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 2:28 PM Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@dell.com> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com> > > Sent: Friday, December 4, 2020 15:27 > > To: Limonciello, Mario > > Cc: Jeff Kirsher; Tony Nguyen; intel-wired-lan; LKML; Linux PM; Netdev; Jakub > > Kicinski; Sasha Netfin; Aaron Brown; Stefan Assmann; David Miller; David > > Arcari; Shen, Yijun; Yuan, Perry; anthony.wong@canonical.com > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] Improve s0ix flows for systems i219LM > > > > > > [EXTERNAL EMAIL] > > > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 12:09 PM Mario Limonciello > > <mario.limonciello@dell.com> wrote: > > > > > > commit e086ba2fccda ("e1000e: disable s0ix entry and exit flows for ME > > systems") > > > disabled s0ix flows for systems that have various incarnations of the > > > i219-LM ethernet controller. This was done because of some regressions > > > caused by an earlier > > > commit 632fbd5eb5b0e ("e1000e: fix S0ix flows for cable connected case") > > > with i219-LM controller. > > > > > > Performing suspend to idle with these ethernet controllers requires a > > properly > > > configured system. To make enabling such systems easier, this patch > > > series allows determining if enabled and turning on using ethtool. > > > > > > The flows have also been confirmed to be configured correctly on Dell's > > Latitude > > > and Precision CML systems containing the i219-LM controller, when the kernel > > also > > > contains the fix for s0i3.2 entry previously submitted here and now part of > > this > > > series. > > > https://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=160677194809564&w=2 > > > > > > Patches 4 through 7 will turn the behavior on by default for some of Dell's > > > CML and TGL systems. > > > > The patches look good to me. Just need to address the minor issue that > > seems to have been present prior to the introduction of this patch > > set. > > > > Reviewed-by: Alexander Duyck <alexanderduyck@fb.com> > > Thanks for your review. Just some operational questions - since this previously > existed do you want me to re-spin the series to a v4 for this, or should it be > a follow up after the series? > > If I respin it, would you prefer that change to occur at the start or end > of the series?
I don't need a respin, but if you are going to fix it you should probably put out the patch as something like a 8/7. If you respin it should happen near the start of the series as it is a bug you are addressing.
| |