Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754108Ab0AZORj (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:17:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754012Ab0AZORi (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:17:38 -0500 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:57057 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753153Ab0AZORh (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:17:37 -0500 Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 15:17:27 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Alan Cox , Jesse Barnes , Len Brown , LKML , pm list , dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Eric Anholt , airlied@linux.ie Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / i915: Skip kernel VT switch during suspend/resume if KMS is used Message-ID: <20100126141726.GA1437@ucw.cz> References: <201001240055.59479.rjw@sisk.pl> <201001252217.39778.rjw@sisk.pl> <20100125212720.7d3af280@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <201001252254.37635.rjw@sisk.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201001252254.37635.rjw@sisk.pl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1544 Lines: 37 On Mon 2010-01-25 22:54:37, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Monday 25 January 2010, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > But in that case we should be able to disable the VT switch disable > > > > path; we just have to check each driver as it's loaded. > > > > > > OK, what the right sequence of checks would be in that case and where to place > > > them? > > > > Why are we even driving a vt switch direct from the suspend/resume > > logic ? The problem starts there. If it was being handled off the device > > suspend/resume method then there wouldn't be a mess to start with ? > > > > Start at the beginning > > > > - Why do we switch to arbitarily chosen 'last vt' > > - Why isn't vt related suspend/resume handled by the device > > Well, that was added long ago as a workaround for some problems people > reported (presumably). I've never looked at that before, so I can't really > tell why someone did it this particular way. As X drives hardware, it is/was neccessary to get control out of X and console switch was convenient. Note that it needs to happen with userland still active -- before freezer. And yes, it should be per-driver these days. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/