* [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/3] x86: S3 resume adjustments
@ 2019-06-14 11:30 Jan Beulich
2019-06-14 11:37 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/ACPI: re-park previously parked CPUs upon resume from S3 Jan Beulich
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2019-06-14 11:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel; +Cc: George Dunlap, Andrew Cooper, Wei Liu, Roger Pau Monne
1: x86/ACPI: re-park previously parked CPUs upon resume from S3
2: x86/ACPI: restore VESA mode upon resume from S3
3: x86: a little bit of 16-bit video mode setting code cleanup
Patch 2 is meant to address an issue I've observed while testing
patch 1, and patch 3 is simply a collection a misc changes noticed
while putting together patch 2 as possibly worthwhile to make.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/ACPI: re-park previously parked CPUs upon resume from S3 2019-06-14 11:30 [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/3] x86: S3 resume adjustments Jan Beulich @ 2019-06-14 11:37 ` Jan Beulich 2019-06-14 16:52 ` Julien Grall 2019-08-29 13:37 ` Andrew Cooper 2019-06-14 11:37 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 2/3] x86/ACPI: restore VESA mode " Jan Beulich 2019-06-14 11:38 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] x86: a little bit of 16-bit video mode setting code cleanup Jan Beulich 2 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Jan Beulich @ 2019-06-14 11:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xen-devel Cc: Stefano Stabellini, Wei Liu, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk, George Dunlap, Andrew Cooper, Ian Jackson, Tim Deegan, Julien Grall Aiui when resuming from S3, CPUs come back out of RESET/INIT. Therefore they need to undergo the same procedure as was added elsewhere by commits d8f974f1a6 ("x86: command line option to avoid use of secondary hyper-threads") and 8797d20a6e ("x86: possibly bring up all CPUs even if not all are supposed to be used"). Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> --- a/xen/common/cpu.c +++ b/xen/common/cpu.c @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ int cpu_down(unsigned int cpu) if ( err ) goto fail; - if ( unlikely(system_state < SYS_STATE_active) ) + if ( system_state < SYS_STATE_active || system_state == SYS_STATE_resume ) on_selected_cpus(cpumask_of(cpu), _take_cpu_down, NULL, true); else if ( (err = stop_machine_run(take_cpu_down, NULL, cpu)) < 0 ) goto fail; @@ -207,15 +207,19 @@ void enable_nonboot_cpus(void) printk("Enabling non-boot CPUs ...\n"); - for_each_cpu ( cpu, &frozen_cpus ) + for_each_present_cpu ( cpu ) { + if ( park_offline_cpus ? cpu == smp_processor_id() + : !cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &frozen_cpus) ) + continue; if ( (error = cpu_up(cpu)) ) { printk("Error bringing CPU%d up: %d\n", cpu, error); BUG_ON(error == -EBUSY); } - else - __cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &frozen_cpus); + else if ( !__cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(cpu, &frozen_cpus) && + (error = cpu_down(cpu)) ) + printk("Error re-offlining CPU%d: %d\n", cpu, error); } for_each_cpu ( cpu, &frozen_cpus ) _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/ACPI: re-park previously parked CPUs upon resume from S3 2019-06-14 11:37 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/ACPI: re-park previously parked CPUs upon resume from S3 Jan Beulich @ 2019-06-14 16:52 ` Julien Grall 2019-06-17 6:40 ` Jan Beulich 2019-08-29 13:37 ` Andrew Cooper 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Julien Grall @ 2019-06-14 16:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Beulich, xen-devel Cc: Stefano Stabellini, Wei Liu, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk, George Dunlap, Andrew Cooper, Tim Deegan, Ian Jackson Hi Jan, The title and commit message are a bit odd to read because you are modifying common code but everything is geared towards x86. On 14/06/2019 12:37, Jan Beulich wrote: > Aiui when resuming from S3, CPUs come back out of RESET/INIT. Therefore > they need to undergo the same procedure as was added elsewhere by > commits d8f974f1a6 ("x86: command line option to avoid use of secondary > hyper-threads") and 8797d20a6e ("x86: possibly bring up all CPUs even > if not all are supposed to be used"). > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > > --- a/xen/common/cpu.c > +++ b/xen/common/cpu.c > @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ int cpu_down(unsigned int cpu) > if ( err ) > goto fail; > > - if ( unlikely(system_state < SYS_STATE_active) ) > + if ( system_state < SYS_STATE_active || system_state == SYS_STATE_resume ) So this change here is necessary because enable_nonboot_cpus() may call cpu_down(), am I right? If so, could you please mention it in the commit message? > on_selected_cpus(cpumask_of(cpu), _take_cpu_down, NULL, true); > else if ( (err = stop_machine_run(take_cpu_down, NULL, cpu)) < 0 ) > goto fail; > @@ -207,15 +207,19 @@ void enable_nonboot_cpus(void) > > printk("Enabling non-boot CPUs ...\n"); > > - for_each_cpu ( cpu, &frozen_cpus ) > + for_each_present_cpu ( cpu ) > { > + if ( park_offline_cpus ? cpu == smp_processor_id() park_offline_cpus is x86 specific, so it will not build on Arm. > + : !cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &frozen_cpus) ) > + continue; > if ( (error = cpu_up(cpu)) ) > { > printk("Error bringing CPU%d up: %d\n", cpu, error); > BUG_ON(error == -EBUSY); > } > - else > - __cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &frozen_cpus); > + else if ( !__cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(cpu, &frozen_cpus) && > + (error = cpu_down(cpu)) ) > + printk("Error re-offlining CPU%d: %d\n", cpu, error); > } > > for_each_cpu ( cpu, &frozen_cpus ) Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/ACPI: re-park previously parked CPUs upon resume from S3 2019-06-14 16:52 ` Julien Grall @ 2019-06-17 6:40 ` Jan Beulich 2019-06-17 8:12 ` Julien Grall 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Jan Beulich @ 2019-06-17 6:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Julien Grall Cc: Stefano Stabellini, WeiLiu, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk, George Dunlap, Andrew Cooper, Ian Jackson, Tim Deegan, xen-devel >>> On 14.06.19 at 18:52, <julien.grall@arm.com> wrote: > The title and commit message are a bit odd to read because you are modifying > common code but everything is geared towards x86. Indeed. There's no caller of {en,dis}able_nonboot_cpus() in Arm code at present, afaics. Hence the code changed (but not the file) is truly x86-specific at the moment. I've explicitly thought about the "inconsistency" between title and contents, but I've deliberately put it as is: The change _is_ x86 / ACPI only, _despite_ touching common code (and hence needing a REST maintainer ack). >> --- a/xen/common/cpu.c >> +++ b/xen/common/cpu.c >> @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ int cpu_down(unsigned int cpu) >> if ( err ) >> goto fail; >> >> - if ( unlikely(system_state < SYS_STATE_active) ) >> + if ( system_state < SYS_STATE_active || system_state == SYS_STATE_resume ) > > So this change here is necessary because enable_nonboot_cpus() may call > cpu_down(), am I right? Yes (albeit likely s/necessary/wanted/). > If so, could you please mention it in the commit message? Hmm, I could. But this is just paralleling what we're already doing for the boot path, so it didn't seem imperative to me to call it out. But anyway, I've added a sentence. >> @@ -207,15 +207,19 @@ void enable_nonboot_cpus(void) >> >> printk("Enabling non-boot CPUs ...\n"); >> >> - for_each_cpu ( cpu, &frozen_cpus ) >> + for_each_present_cpu ( cpu ) >> { >> + if ( park_offline_cpus ? cpu == smp_processor_id() > > park_offline_cpus is x86 specific, so it will not build on Arm. And that's intentional, even more so that (as said above) Arm doesn't call here in the first place. And even if it did - whether to do things the "new" way would then still (intentionally) depend on whether Arm had any way of park_offline_cpus being "true". Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/ACPI: re-park previously parked CPUs upon resume from S3 2019-06-17 6:40 ` Jan Beulich @ 2019-06-17 8:12 ` Julien Grall 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Julien Grall @ 2019-06-17 8:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Beulich Cc: Stefano Stabellini, WeiLiu, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk, George Dunlap, Andrew Cooper, Ian Jackson, Tim Deegan, xen-devel Hi Jan, On 6/17/19 7:40 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 14.06.19 at 18:52, <julien.grall@arm.com> wrote: >> The title and commit message are a bit odd to read because you are modifying >> common code but everything is geared towards x86. > > Indeed. There's no caller of {en,dis}able_nonboot_cpus() in Arm code > at present, afaics. Hence the code changed (but not the file) is truly > x86-specific at the moment. I've explicitly thought about the > "inconsistency" between title and contents, but I've deliberately put it > as is: The change _is_ x86 / ACPI only, _despite_ touching common > code (and hence needing a REST maintainer ack). Bear in mind that I have nearly no knowledge of x86, so trying to write a commit message fully the x86 way is not going to help me understand why this makes sense for everyone (today or in the future). >>> @@ -207,15 +207,19 @@ void enable_nonboot_cpus(void) >>> >>> printk("Enabling non-boot CPUs ...\n"); >>> >>> - for_each_cpu ( cpu, &frozen_cpus ) >>> + for_each_present_cpu ( cpu ) >>> { >>> + if ( park_offline_cpus ? cpu == smp_processor_id() >> >> park_offline_cpus is x86 specific, so it will not build on Arm. > > And that's intentional, even more so that (as said above) Arm doesn't > call here in the first place. Calling and building are two separate things... A function may be built even if it is not called. > And even if it did - whether to do things the > "new" way would then still (intentionally) depend on whether Arm had > any way of park_offline_cpus being "true". Looking again, we are defining park_offline_cpus to false on Arm (see a6448adfd3 "xen/cpu: Fix ARM build following c/s 597fbb8"). So there are no build issue as I first thought. Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/ACPI: re-park previously parked CPUs upon resume from S3 2019-06-14 11:37 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/ACPI: re-park previously parked CPUs upon resume from S3 Jan Beulich 2019-06-14 16:52 ` Julien Grall @ 2019-08-29 13:37 ` Andrew Cooper 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Andrew Cooper @ 2019-08-29 13:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Beulich, xen-devel Cc: Stefano Stabellini, Wei Liu, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk, George Dunlap, Ian Jackson, Tim Deegan, Julien Grall On 14/06/2019 12:37, Jan Beulich wrote: > Aiui when resuming from S3, CPUs come back out of RESET/INIT. From a programmers point of view, all APs are in Wait-for-SIPI after resume, and this is confirmed by several of the BWG flowcharts. This is a logical consequence of the CPU losing all power, meaning that its startup sequence will be the same whether it is booting from S5 or S3. > Therefore > they need to undergo the same procedure as was added elsewhere by > commits d8f974f1a6 ("x86: command line option to avoid use of secondary > hyper-threads") and 8797d20a6e ("x86: possibly bring up all CPUs even > if not all are supposed to be used"). > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> Acked-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 2/3] x86/ACPI: restore VESA mode upon resume from S3 2019-06-14 11:30 [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/3] x86: S3 resume adjustments Jan Beulich 2019-06-14 11:37 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/ACPI: re-park previously parked CPUs upon resume from S3 Jan Beulich @ 2019-06-14 11:37 ` Jan Beulich 2019-08-29 14:45 ` Andrew Cooper 2019-06-14 11:38 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] x86: a little bit of 16-bit video mode setting code cleanup Jan Beulich 2 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Jan Beulich @ 2019-06-14 11:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xen-devel; +Cc: George Dunlap, Andrew Cooper, WeiLiu, Roger Pau Monne In order for "acpi_sleep=s3_mode" to have any effect, we should record the video mode we switched to during boot. Since right now there's mode setting code for VESA modes only in the resume case, record the mode just in that one case. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> --- RFC: On the box that I've been trying to test this on this didn't really make a difference (in the random cases where resume works in the first place there): The graphics card looks to remain powered off even after the Dom0 kernel has resumed. Additionally using "acpi_sleep=s3_bios" didn't make a difference either. Furthermore it looks like the serial console (connected via PCI card) doesn't work (yet) immediately after resume (I suppose it too is powered down), and resume hangs altogether with it in use. Hence it's sort of difficult to actually debug anything here. --- I'm wondering actually whether the user having to explicitly request the mode restoration is a good model: Why would we _not_ want to restore the mode we've set during boot? In the worst case Dom0 kernel or X will change the mode another time. --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/video.S +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/video.S @@ -455,14 +455,17 @@ check_vesa: cmpb $0x99, %al jnz _setbad # Doh! No linear frame buffer. + pushw %bx subb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %bh orw $0x4000, %bx # Use linear frame buffer movw $0x4f02, %ax # VESA BIOS mode set call int $0x10 + popw %bx cmpw $0x004f, %ax # AL=4f if implemented jnz _setbad # AH=0 if OK movb $1, bootsym(graphic_mode) # flag graphic mode + movw %bx, bootsym(video_mode) stc ret _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 2/3] x86/ACPI: restore VESA mode upon resume from S3 2019-06-14 11:37 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 2/3] x86/ACPI: restore VESA mode " Jan Beulich @ 2019-08-29 14:45 ` Andrew Cooper 2019-08-29 15:18 ` Jan Beulich 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Andrew Cooper @ 2019-08-29 14:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Beulich, xen-devel; +Cc: George Dunlap, WeiLiu, Roger Pau Monne On 14/06/2019 12:37, Jan Beulich wrote: > In order for "acpi_sleep=s3_mode" to have any effect, we should record > the video mode we switched to during boot. Since right now there's mode > setting code for VESA modes only in the resume case, record the mode > just in that one case. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > --- > RFC: On the box that I've been trying to test this on this didn't really > make a difference (in the random cases where resume works in the > first place there): The graphics card looks to remain powered off > even after the Dom0 kernel has resumed. Additionally using > "acpi_sleep=s3_bios" didn't make a difference either. Furthermore > it looks like the serial console (connected via PCI card) doesn't > work (yet) immediately after resume (I suppose it too is powered > down), and resume hangs altogether with it in use. Hence it's sort > of difficult to actually debug anything here. While you were away, I had an awful time debugging c/s 7aae9c1c91, even with COM1. I think we should take some proactive steps to try and make the serial settings more robust, so printk() does continue to function before the console irq gets restored. In the case of legacy COM1/COM2, this should be falling back to polled mode which at least lets the characters get out, and for PCI serial cards, we should probably make an attempt to bring it out of D3 ahead of relying on dom0 to do this. > --- > I'm wondering actually whether the user having to explicitly request the > mode restoration is a good model: Why would we _not_ want to restore the > mode we've set during boot? In the worst case Dom0 kernel or X will > change the mode another time. I think I agree. I can't see anything good which can come from offering a choice here, and I am all for reducing the quantity of 16bit VGA code we have. ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 2/3] x86/ACPI: restore VESA mode upon resume from S3 2019-08-29 14:45 ` Andrew Cooper @ 2019-08-29 15:18 ` Jan Beulich 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Jan Beulich @ 2019-08-29 15:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Cooper; +Cc: George Dunlap, xen-devel, WeiLiu, Roger Pau Monne On 29.08.2019 16:45, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 14/06/2019 12:37, Jan Beulich wrote: >> --- >> I'm wondering actually whether the user having to explicitly request the >> mode restoration is a good model: Why would we _not_ want to restore the >> mode we've set during boot? In the worst case Dom0 kernel or X will >> change the mode another time. > > I think I agree. I can't see anything good which can come from offering > a choice here, and I am all for reducing the quantity of 16bit VGA code > we have. Well, mode restoration may of course hang due to BIOS issues. But in such a case the question is how sensible it is to use S3 on such a system. Also note that adjusting this isn't going to reduce the quantity of 16-bit code; it would only be a change to what video_flags defaults to. Right now, without the command line option provided, mode restoration would happen only if reset_videomode_after_s3() gets invoked, i.e. just on a single Toshiba laptop model which I guess didn't even have 64-bit capable CPUs. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] x86: a little bit of 16-bit video mode setting code cleanup 2019-06-14 11:30 [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/3] x86: S3 resume adjustments Jan Beulich 2019-06-14 11:37 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/ACPI: re-park previously parked CPUs upon resume from S3 Jan Beulich 2019-06-14 11:37 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 2/3] x86/ACPI: restore VESA mode " Jan Beulich @ 2019-06-14 11:38 ` Jan Beulich 2019-08-29 14:08 ` Andrew Cooper 2 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Jan Beulich @ 2019-06-14 11:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xen-devel; +Cc: George Dunlap, Andrew Cooper, WeiLiu, Roger Pau Monne To "compensate" for the code size growth by an earlier change: - drop "trampoline" labels (in almost all cases the target label is reachable with an 8-bit-displacement branch anyway, and a single 16- bit-displacement branch is still better than a pair of two branches) - drop an entirely dead insn - reduce code size in a few other (obvious I hope) cases, by more suitable insn/operands selection Also drop redundant #define-s (move suitable #include a little earlier instead) and add two alignment directives. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/trampoline.S +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/trampoline.S @@ -176,6 +176,7 @@ start64: jmpq *%rdi +#include "video.h" #include "wakeup.S" .balign 8 @@ -283,8 +284,6 @@ trampoline_boot_cpu_entry: /* Jump to the common bootstrap entry point. */ jmp trampoline_protmode_entry -#include "video.h" - .align 2 /* Keep in sync with cmdline.c:early_boot_opts_t type! */ early_boot_opts: --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/video.S +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/video.S @@ -384,9 +384,6 @@ lmbad: leaw bootsym(unknt), %si jmp mode_menu lmdef: ret -_setrec: jmp setrec # Ugly... -_set_80x25: jmp set_80x25 - # Setting of user mode (AX=mode ID) => CF=success mode_set: movw %ax, bootsym(boot_vid_mode) @@ -396,7 +393,7 @@ mode_set: je setvesabysize testb $VIDEO_RECALC>>8, %ah - jnz _setrec + jnz setrec cmpb $VIDEO_FIRST_SPECIAL>>8, %ah jz setspc @@ -421,7 +418,7 @@ setspc: xorb %bh, %bh setmenu: orb %al, %al # 80x25 is an exception - jz _set_80x25 + jz set_80x25 pushw %bx # Set mode chosen from menu call mode_table # Build the mode table @@ -441,36 +438,32 @@ check_vesa: cmpw $0x004f, %ax jnz setbad - leaw vesa_mode_info, %di - subb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %bh - movw %bx, %cx # Get mode information structure + leaw vesa_mode_info, %di # Get mode information structure + leaw -VIDEO_FIRST_VESA(%bx), %cx movw $0x4f01, %ax int $0x10 - addb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %bh cmpw $0x004f, %ax jnz setbad movb (%di), %al # Check mode attributes. andb $0x99, %al cmpb $0x99, %al - jnz _setbad # Doh! No linear frame buffer. + jnz setbad # Doh! No linear frame buffer. pushw %bx subb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %bh - orw $0x4000, %bx # Use linear frame buffer + orb $0x40, %bh # Use linear frame buffer movw $0x4f02, %ax # VESA BIOS mode set call int $0x10 popw %bx cmpw $0x004f, %ax # AL=4f if implemented - jnz _setbad # AH=0 if OK + jnz setbad # AH=0 if OK movb $1, bootsym(graphic_mode) # flag graphic mode movw %bx, bootsym(video_mode) stc ret -_setbad: jmp setbad # Ugly... - # Recalculate vertical display end registers -- this fixes various # inconsistencies of extended modes on many adapters. Called when # the VIDEO_RECALC flag is set in the mode ID. @@ -515,7 +508,7 @@ setvesabysize: leaw modelist,%si 1: add $8,%si cmpw $ASK_VGA,-8(%si) # End? - je _setbad + je setbad movw -6(%si),%ax cmpw %ax,bootsym(vesa_size)+0 jne 1b @@ -948,6 +941,7 @@ store_edid: #endif ret + .p2align 1 mt_end: .word 0 # End of video mode table if built edit_buf: .space 6 # Line editor buffer card_name: .word 0 # Pointer to adapter name @@ -991,6 +985,7 @@ vesa_name: .asciz "VESA" name_bann: .asciz "Video adapter: " + .p2align 1 force_size: .word 0 # Use this size instead of the one in BIOS vars GLOBAL(boot_vid_info) --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/wakeup.S +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/wakeup.S @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_start) jne bogus_real_magic # for acpi_sleep=s3_bios - testl $1, wakesym(video_flags) + testb $1, wakesym(video_flags) jz 1f lcall $0xc000, $3 movw %cs, %ax # In case messed by BIOS @@ -38,9 +38,9 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_start) movw %ax, %ss # Need this? How to ret if clobbered? 1: # for acpi_sleep=s3_mode - testl $2, wakesym(video_flags) + testb $2, wakesym(video_flags) jz 1f - movl wakesym(video_mode), %eax + movw wakesym(video_mode), %ax call mode_setw 1: # Show some progress if VGA is resumed @@ -55,48 +55,26 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_start) lmsw %ax # Turn on CR0.PE ljmpl $BOOT_CS32, $bootsym_rel(wakeup_32, 6) -/* This code uses an extended set of video mode numbers. These include: - * Aliases for standard modes - * NORMAL_VGA (-1) - * EXTENDED_VGA (-2) - * ASK_VGA (-3) - * Video modes numbered by menu position -- NOT RECOMMENDED because of lack - * of compatibility when extending the table. These are between 0x00 and 0xff. - */ -#define VIDEO_FIRST_MENU 0x0000 - -/* Standard BIOS video modes (BIOS number + 0x0100) */ -#define VIDEO_FIRST_BIOS 0x0100 - -/* VESA BIOS video modes (VESA number + 0x0200) */ -#define VIDEO_FIRST_VESA 0x0200 - -/* Video7 special modes (BIOS number + 0x0900) */ -#define VIDEO_FIRST_V7 0x0900 - # Setting of user mode (AX=mode ID) => CF=success mode_setw: movw %ax, %bx cmpb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %ah jnc check_vesaw - decb %ah setbadw: clc ret check_vesaw: subb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %bh - orw $0x4000, %bx # Use linear frame buffer + orb $0x40, %bh # Use linear frame buffer movw $0x4f02, %ax # VESA BIOS mode set call int $0x10 cmpw $0x004f, %ax # AL=4f if implemented - jnz _setbadw # AH=0 if OK + jnz setbadw # AH=0 if OK stc ret -_setbadw: jmp setbadw - bogus_real_magic: movw $0x0e00 + 'B', %fs:(0x12) jmp bogus_real_magic _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] x86: a little bit of 16-bit video mode setting code cleanup 2019-06-14 11:38 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] x86: a little bit of 16-bit video mode setting code cleanup Jan Beulich @ 2019-08-29 14:08 ` Andrew Cooper 2019-08-29 14:23 ` Jan Beulich 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Andrew Cooper @ 2019-08-29 14:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Beulich, xen-devel; +Cc: George Dunlap, WeiLiu, Roger Pau Monne On 14/06/2019 12:38, Jan Beulich wrote: > To "compensate" for the code size growth by an earlier change: > - drop "trampoline" labels (in almost all cases the target label is > reachable with an 8-bit-displacement branch anyway, and a single 16- > bit-displacement branch is still better than a pair of two branches) Do you happen to know why we any to start with? It can't plausibly be for manual code alignment reasons. (probably) whatever the reason, good riddance. > - drop an entirely dead insn > - reduce code size in a few other (obvious I hope) cases, by more > suitable insn/operands selection I'm afraid these are rather hard to identify, given no hints. Comments in line. > Also drop redundant #define-s (move suitable #include a little earlier > instead) and add two alignment directives. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/trampoline.S > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/trampoline.S > @@ -176,6 +176,7 @@ start64: > > jmpq *%rdi > > +#include "video.h" > #include "wakeup.S" > > .balign 8 > @@ -283,8 +284,6 @@ trampoline_boot_cpu_entry: > /* Jump to the common bootstrap entry point. */ > jmp trampoline_protmode_entry > > -#include "video.h" > - > .align 2 > /* Keep in sync with cmdline.c:early_boot_opts_t type! */ > early_boot_opts: > --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/video.S > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/video.S > @@ -384,9 +384,6 @@ lmbad: leaw bootsym(unknt), %si > jmp mode_menu > lmdef: ret > > -_setrec: jmp setrec # Ugly... > -_set_80x25: jmp set_80x25 > - > # Setting of user mode (AX=mode ID) => CF=success > mode_set: > movw %ax, bootsym(boot_vid_mode) > @@ -396,7 +393,7 @@ mode_set: > je setvesabysize > > testb $VIDEO_RECALC>>8, %ah > - jnz _setrec > + jnz setrec > > cmpb $VIDEO_FIRST_SPECIAL>>8, %ah > jz setspc > @@ -421,7 +418,7 @@ setspc: xorb %bh, %bh > > setmenu: > orb %al, %al # 80x25 is an exception > - jz _set_80x25 > + jz set_80x25 > > pushw %bx # Set mode chosen from menu > call mode_table # Build the mode table > @@ -441,36 +438,32 @@ check_vesa: > cmpw $0x004f, %ax > jnz setbad > > - leaw vesa_mode_info, %di > - subb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %bh > - movw %bx, %cx # Get mode information structure > + leaw vesa_mode_info, %di # Get mode information structure > + leaw -VIDEO_FIRST_VESA(%bx), %cx > movw $0x4f01, %ax > int $0x10 > - addb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %bh Is this the redundant instruction you are talking about, or ... (near the end)? I think I follow this as "no logical change", by leaving %bx intact throughout, and only clearing %ch as part of the %bx=>%cx copy. > cmpw $0x004f, %ax > jnz setbad > > movb (%di), %al # Check mode attributes. > andb $0x99, %al > cmpb $0x99, %al > - jnz _setbad # Doh! No linear frame buffer. > + jnz setbad # Doh! No linear frame buffer. > > pushw %bx > subb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %bh > - orw $0x4000, %bx # Use linear frame buffer > + orb $0x40, %bh # Use linear frame buffer > movw $0x4f02, %ax # VESA BIOS mode set call > int $0x10 > popw %bx > cmpw $0x004f, %ax # AL=4f if implemented > - jnz _setbad # AH=0 if OK > + jnz setbad # AH=0 if OK > > movb $1, bootsym(graphic_mode) # flag graphic mode > movw %bx, bootsym(video_mode) > stc > ret > > -_setbad: jmp setbad # Ugly... > - > # Recalculate vertical display end registers -- this fixes various > # inconsistencies of extended modes on many adapters. Called when > # the VIDEO_RECALC flag is set in the mode ID. > @@ -515,7 +508,7 @@ setvesabysize: > leaw modelist,%si > 1: add $8,%si > cmpw $ASK_VGA,-8(%si) # End? > - je _setbad > + je setbad > movw -6(%si),%ax > cmpw %ax,bootsym(vesa_size)+0 > jne 1b > @@ -948,6 +941,7 @@ store_edid: > #endif > ret > > + .p2align 1 > mt_end: .word 0 # End of video mode table if built > edit_buf: .space 6 # Line editor buffer > card_name: .word 0 # Pointer to adapter name > @@ -991,6 +985,7 @@ vesa_name: .asciz "VESA" > > name_bann: .asciz "Video adapter: " > > + .p2align 1 > force_size: .word 0 # Use this size instead of the one in BIOS vars > > GLOBAL(boot_vid_info) > --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/wakeup.S > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/wakeup.S > @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_start) > jne bogus_real_magic > > # for acpi_sleep=s3_bios > - testl $1, wakesym(video_flags) > + testb $1, wakesym(video_flags) video_flags is currently .long, and, AFAICT, uses 2 bits even after this series. We could get better code reduction by shrinking it to .byte. > jz 1f > lcall $0xc000, $3 > movw %cs, %ax # In case messed by BIOS > @@ -38,9 +38,9 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_start) > movw %ax, %ss # Need this? How to ret if clobbered? > > 1: # for acpi_sleep=s3_mode > - testl $2, wakesym(video_flags) > + testb $2, wakesym(video_flags) > jz 1f > - movl wakesym(video_mode), %eax > + movw wakesym(video_mode), %ax Similarly, video_mode can become .word, I think. > call mode_setw > > 1: # Show some progress if VGA is resumed > @@ -55,48 +55,26 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_start) > lmsw %ax # Turn on CR0.PE > ljmpl $BOOT_CS32, $bootsym_rel(wakeup_32, 6) > > -/* This code uses an extended set of video mode numbers. These include: > - * Aliases for standard modes > - * NORMAL_VGA (-1) > - * EXTENDED_VGA (-2) > - * ASK_VGA (-3) > - * Video modes numbered by menu position -- NOT RECOMMENDED because of lack > - * of compatibility when extending the table. These are between 0x00 and 0xff. > - */ > -#define VIDEO_FIRST_MENU 0x0000 > - > -/* Standard BIOS video modes (BIOS number + 0x0100) */ > -#define VIDEO_FIRST_BIOS 0x0100 > - > -/* VESA BIOS video modes (VESA number + 0x0200) */ > -#define VIDEO_FIRST_VESA 0x0200 > - > -/* Video7 special modes (BIOS number + 0x0900) */ > -#define VIDEO_FIRST_V7 0x0900 > - > # Setting of user mode (AX=mode ID) => CF=success > mode_setw: > movw %ax, %bx > cmpb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %ah > jnc check_vesaw > - decb %ah ... or is this the no functional change? If so, I'm not sure I agree, given the clc below. ~Andrew > > setbadw: clc > ret > > check_vesaw: > subb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %bh > - orw $0x4000, %bx # Use linear frame buffer > + orb $0x40, %bh # Use linear frame buffer > movw $0x4f02, %ax # VESA BIOS mode set call > int $0x10 > cmpw $0x004f, %ax # AL=4f if implemented > - jnz _setbadw # AH=0 if OK > + jnz setbadw # AH=0 if OK > > stc > ret > > -_setbadw: jmp setbadw > - > bogus_real_magic: > movw $0x0e00 + 'B', %fs:(0x12) > jmp bogus_real_magic > > > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] x86: a little bit of 16-bit video mode setting code cleanup 2019-08-29 14:08 ` Andrew Cooper @ 2019-08-29 14:23 ` Jan Beulich 2019-08-29 14:38 ` Andrew Cooper 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Jan Beulich @ 2019-08-29 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Cooper; +Cc: George Dunlap, xen-devel, WeiLiu, Roger Pau Monne On 29.08.2019 16:08, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 14/06/2019 12:38, Jan Beulich wrote: >> To "compensate" for the code size growth by an earlier change: >> - drop "trampoline" labels (in almost all cases the target label is >> reachable with an 8-bit-displacement branch anyway, and a single 16- >> bit-displacement branch is still better than a pair of two branches) > > Do you happen to know why we any to start with? It can't plausibly be > for manual code alignment reasons. I have no idea - my guess is that some pre-386 code was cloned, or it was written by someone used to the pre-386 limitations. >> @@ -421,7 +418,7 @@ setspc: xorb %bh, %bh >> >> setmenu: >> orb %al, %al # 80x25 is an exception >> - jz _set_80x25 >> + jz set_80x25 >> >> pushw %bx # Set mode chosen from menu >> call mode_table # Build the mode table >> @@ -441,36 +438,32 @@ check_vesa: >> cmpw $0x004f, %ax >> jnz setbad >> >> - leaw vesa_mode_info, %di >> - subb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %bh >> - movw %bx, %cx # Get mode information structure >> + leaw vesa_mode_info, %di # Get mode information structure >> + leaw -VIDEO_FIRST_VESA(%bx), %cx >> movw $0x4f01, %ax >> int $0x10 >> - addb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %bh > > Is this the redundant instruction you are talking about, or ... (near > the end)? No, here it's simply ... > I think I follow this as "no logical change", by leaving %bx intact > throughout, and only clearing %ch as part of the %bx=>%cx copy. ... as you say. >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/wakeup.S >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/wakeup.S >> @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_start) >> jne bogus_real_magic >> >> # for acpi_sleep=s3_bios >> - testl $1, wakesym(video_flags) >> + testb $1, wakesym(video_flags) > > video_flags is currently .long, and, AFAICT, uses 2 bits even after this > series. We could get better code reduction by shrinking it to .byte. Well, the goal of this patch is to play with the assembly code. To do what you suggest I'd have to touch a C (or really .h) file as well. I'm fine doing this change though, but preferably in a separate patch. >> @@ -38,9 +38,9 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_start) >> movw %ax, %ss # Need this? How to ret if clobbered? >> >> 1: # for acpi_sleep=s3_mode >> - testl $2, wakesym(video_flags) >> + testb $2, wakesym(video_flags) >> jz 1f >> - movl wakesym(video_mode), %eax >> + movw wakesym(video_mode), %ax > > Similarly, video_mode can become .word, I think. But a word is less efficient to access (because of the operand size override), so I'd prefer to not shrink this one. Just let me know whether you agree, and I'll cook up a patch accordingly. >> @@ -55,48 +55,26 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_start) >> lmsw %ax # Turn on CR0.PE >> ljmpl $BOOT_CS32, $bootsym_rel(wakeup_32, 6) >> >> -/* This code uses an extended set of video mode numbers. These include: >> - * Aliases for standard modes >> - * NORMAL_VGA (-1) >> - * EXTENDED_VGA (-2) >> - * ASK_VGA (-3) >> - * Video modes numbered by menu position -- NOT RECOMMENDED because of lack >> - * of compatibility when extending the table. These are between 0x00 and 0xff. >> - */ >> -#define VIDEO_FIRST_MENU 0x0000 >> - >> -/* Standard BIOS video modes (BIOS number + 0x0100) */ >> -#define VIDEO_FIRST_BIOS 0x0100 >> - >> -/* VESA BIOS video modes (VESA number + 0x0200) */ >> -#define VIDEO_FIRST_VESA 0x0200 >> - >> -/* Video7 special modes (BIOS number + 0x0900) */ >> -#define VIDEO_FIRST_V7 0x0900 >> - >> # Setting of user mode (AX=mode ID) => CF=success >> mode_setw: >> movw %ax, %bx >> cmpb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %ah >> jnc check_vesaw >> - decb %ah > > ... or is this the no functional change? If so, I'm not sure I agree, > given the clc below. How does the CLC matter? CF, as the comment says, indicates success. Whether or not there's a DEC ahead of it (which doesn't even alter CF) doesn't matter, does it? In any event - yes, that's the dead insn. I'll mention the function name in the description. Jan >> setbadw: clc >> ret _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] x86: a little bit of 16-bit video mode setting code cleanup 2019-08-29 14:23 ` Jan Beulich @ 2019-08-29 14:38 ` Andrew Cooper 2019-08-29 15:07 ` Jan Beulich 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Andrew Cooper @ 2019-08-29 14:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Beulich; +Cc: George Dunlap, xen-devel, WeiLiu, Roger Pau Monne On 29/08/2019 15:23, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 29.08.2019 16:08, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 14/06/2019 12:38, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> To "compensate" for the code size growth by an earlier change: >>> - drop "trampoline" labels (in almost all cases the target label is >>> reachable with an 8-bit-displacement branch anyway, and a single 16- >>> bit-displacement branch is still better than a pair of two branches) >> Do you happen to know why we any to start with? It can't plausibly be >> for manual code alignment reasons. > I have no idea - my guess is that some pre-386 code was cloned, or > it was written by someone used to the pre-386 limitations. > >>> @@ -421,7 +418,7 @@ setspc: xorb %bh, %bh >>> >>> setmenu: >>> orb %al, %al # 80x25 is an exception >>> - jz _set_80x25 >>> + jz set_80x25 >>> >>> pushw %bx # Set mode chosen from menu >>> call mode_table # Build the mode table >>> @@ -441,36 +438,32 @@ check_vesa: >>> cmpw $0x004f, %ax >>> jnz setbad >>> >>> - leaw vesa_mode_info, %di >>> - subb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %bh >>> - movw %bx, %cx # Get mode information structure >>> + leaw vesa_mode_info, %di # Get mode information structure >>> + leaw -VIDEO_FIRST_VESA(%bx), %cx >>> movw $0x4f01, %ax >>> int $0x10 >>> - addb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %bh >> Is this the redundant instruction you are talking about, or ... (near >> the end)? > No, here it's simply ... > >> I think I follow this as "no logical change", by leaving %bx intact >> throughout, and only clearing %ch as part of the %bx=>%cx copy. > ... as you say. > >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/wakeup.S >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/wakeup.S >>> @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_start) >>> jne bogus_real_magic >>> >>> # for acpi_sleep=s3_bios >>> - testl $1, wakesym(video_flags) >>> + testb $1, wakesym(video_flags) >> video_flags is currently .long, and, AFAICT, uses 2 bits even after this >> series. We could get better code reduction by shrinking it to .byte. > Well, the goal of this patch is to play with the assembly code. To > do what you suggest I'd have to touch a C (or really .h) file as > well. I'm fine doing this change though, but preferably in a separate > patch. This is fine, and may indeed want to wait until David has finished trampoline work. > >>> @@ -38,9 +38,9 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_start) >>> movw %ax, %ss # Need this? How to ret if clobbered? >>> >>> 1: # for acpi_sleep=s3_mode >>> - testl $2, wakesym(video_flags) >>> + testb $2, wakesym(video_flags) >>> jz 1f >>> - movl wakesym(video_mode), %eax >>> + movw wakesym(video_mode), %ax >> Similarly, video_mode can become .word, I think. > But a word is less efficient to access (because of the operand size > override), so I'd prefer to not shrink this one. Just let me know > whether you agree, and I'll cook up a patch accordingly. This is 16 bit code so it is movl which has the operand size prefix, not movw. It is extern'd in C, but not wrapped in bootsym(), and I can't see it being read anywhere. > >>> @@ -55,48 +55,26 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_start) >>> lmsw %ax # Turn on CR0.PE >>> ljmpl $BOOT_CS32, $bootsym_rel(wakeup_32, 6) >>> >>> -/* This code uses an extended set of video mode numbers. These include: >>> - * Aliases for standard modes >>> - * NORMAL_VGA (-1) >>> - * EXTENDED_VGA (-2) >>> - * ASK_VGA (-3) >>> - * Video modes numbered by menu position -- NOT RECOMMENDED because of lack >>> - * of compatibility when extending the table. These are between 0x00 and 0xff. >>> - */ >>> -#define VIDEO_FIRST_MENU 0x0000 >>> - >>> -/* Standard BIOS video modes (BIOS number + 0x0100) */ >>> -#define VIDEO_FIRST_BIOS 0x0100 >>> - >>> -/* VESA BIOS video modes (VESA number + 0x0200) */ >>> -#define VIDEO_FIRST_VESA 0x0200 >>> - >>> -/* Video7 special modes (BIOS number + 0x0900) */ >>> -#define VIDEO_FIRST_V7 0x0900 >>> - >>> # Setting of user mode (AX=mode ID) => CF=success >>> mode_setw: >>> movw %ax, %bx >>> cmpb $VIDEO_FIRST_VESA>>8, %ah >>> jnc check_vesaw >>> - decb %ah >> ... or is this the no functional change? If so, I'm not sure I agree, >> given the clc below. > How does the CLC matter? CF, as the comment says, indicates success. > Whether or not there's a DEC ahead of it (which doesn't even alter > CF) doesn't matter, does it? I'd forgotten that dec left CF intact, and was thinking more like sub $1, where it would matter. > In any event - yes, that's the dead insn. I'll mention the function > name in the description. Please do. ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] x86: a little bit of 16-bit video mode setting code cleanup 2019-08-29 14:38 ` Andrew Cooper @ 2019-08-29 15:07 ` Jan Beulich 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Jan Beulich @ 2019-08-29 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Cooper; +Cc: George Dunlap, xen-devel, WeiLiu, Roger Pau Monne On 29.08.2019 16:38, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 29/08/2019 15:23, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 29.08.2019 16:08, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>> On 14/06/2019 12:38, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> @@ -38,9 +38,9 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_start) >>>> movw %ax, %ss # Need this? How to ret if clobbered? >>>> >>>> 1: # for acpi_sleep=s3_mode >>>> - testl $2, wakesym(video_flags) >>>> + testb $2, wakesym(video_flags) >>>> jz 1f >>>> - movl wakesym(video_mode), %eax >>>> + movw wakesym(video_mode), %ax >>> Similarly, video_mode can become .word, I think. >> But a word is less efficient to access (because of the operand size >> override), so I'd prefer to not shrink this one. Just let me know >> whether you agree, and I'll cook up a patch accordingly. > > This is 16 bit code so it is movl which has the operand size prefix, not > movw. > > It is extern'd in C, but not wrapped in bootsym(), and I can't see it > being read anywhere. Oh, indeed. I'll ditch the extern then. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-08-29 15:18 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2019-06-14 11:30 [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/3] x86: S3 resume adjustments Jan Beulich 2019-06-14 11:37 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/ACPI: re-park previously parked CPUs upon resume from S3 Jan Beulich 2019-06-14 16:52 ` Julien Grall 2019-06-17 6:40 ` Jan Beulich 2019-06-17 8:12 ` Julien Grall 2019-08-29 13:37 ` Andrew Cooper 2019-06-14 11:37 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 2/3] x86/ACPI: restore VESA mode " Jan Beulich 2019-08-29 14:45 ` Andrew Cooper 2019-08-29 15:18 ` Jan Beulich 2019-06-14 11:38 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] x86: a little bit of 16-bit video mode setting code cleanup Jan Beulich 2019-08-29 14:08 ` Andrew Cooper 2019-08-29 14:23 ` Jan Beulich 2019-08-29 14:38 ` Andrew Cooper 2019-08-29 15:07 ` Jan Beulich
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).