archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <>
To: Patrick Mochel <>
Cc: "Grover, Andrew" <>,
	Alan Cox <>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <>
Subject: RE: Subtle semantic issue with sleep callbacks in drivers
Date: 16 Apr 2003 21:36:03 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1050521763.644.9.camel@debian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0304161133110.912-100000@cherise>

On Wed, 2003-04-16 at 20:39, Patrick Mochel wrote:

> I completely agree with Andy. We should not re-POST the video hardware, no
> matter what. The idea behind ACPI is that the OS takes care of everything, 
> including video save/restore. 

If I understand Alan properly, we don't always have choice, some BIOSes
will do it anyway...

> We may not have the documentation to properly do that for all hardware 
> currently, but that is something that we have to suck up and deal with. 
> For now, we go with hardware that we're able to handle. 
> The drivers that cannot support reinitialization will not be able to 
> support suspend-to-RAM. When we get to a point where it really becomes an 
> issue (i.e. after we have decent working code), then we concentrate on 
> getting the appropriate docuementation (or code itself, source or binary) 
> to do it correctly. 

It is now already ! I don't think we will _ever_ get ATI and nVidia
provide enough documentation to POST all chip models (which isn't always
possible without knowledge of every single way the chip is wired on a
each board).

Currently, I cannot implement suspend-to-RAM on the latest PowerBooks
because of that (they use nVidia chip that are powered down and not just
unclocked unlike earlier ATI based models) because of that. Nor can I
implement it on any other "desktop" Mac.

> Trying to figure out if we need to POST or not for different hardware, 
> based what the driver knows, is going to become quite a mess real fast. I 
> don't want to deal with the pain, and would rather take the high ground, 
> even if it means suffering in the short term. 

When I finally have an implementation of an OF runtime so I can re-POST
the card, I could eventually have the driver itself call this to explicitely
ask for a re-POST...


  reply	other threads:[~2003-04-16 19:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-04-14 21:09 Subtle semantic issue with sleep callbacks in drivers Grover, Andrew
2003-04-16 18:39 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-04-16 19:36   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2003-04-17 13:35   ` Alan Cox
2003-04-17 14:48     ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-17 15:09       ` John Bradford
2003-04-17 15:09         ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-17 15:47           ` John Bradford
2003-04-17 15:56             ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-17 16:24               ` Alan Cox
2003-04-18  7:37             ` Greg KH
2003-04-18  7:51               ` John Bradford
2003-04-18  9:10               ` Russell King
2003-04-18 11:18                 ` Alan Cox
2003-04-18 11:30               ` Alan Cox
2003-04-29  8:28         ` Pavel Machek
2003-04-17 14:59     ` John Bradford
2003-04-17 15:04       ` Alan Cox
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-04-14 19:07 Grover, Andrew
2003-04-14 19:18 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-04-14 19:56 ` Alan Cox
2003-04-23 15:34 ` Pavel Machek
2003-04-14 17:09 Grover, Andrew
2003-04-14 17:40 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-04-23 15:29 ` Pavel Machek
2003-04-14 10:00 Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-04-14 10:11 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-04-16 18:31 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-04-16 19:29   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-04-23 15:32 ` Pavel Machek

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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1050521763.644.9.camel@debian \ \ \ \ \ \

* 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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).