Messages in this thread | | | From | "Grover, Andrew" <> | Subject | RE: Subtle semantic issue with sleep callbacks in drivers | Date | Mon, 14 Apr 2003 12:07:18 -0700 |
| |
> From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt [mailto:benh@kernel.crashing.org] > On Mon, 2003-04-14 at 19:09, Grover, Andrew wrote: > > Ben obviously PPC is ahead of the pack on this stuff > (congrats) but I > > did just want to put forward the idea that when we're all done with > > this stuff on all archs, we will hopefully not be regularly > re-POSTing > > the video bios. > > But how ? let's make clear what we call POST first ... > > If the card is powered off, it must be POSTed to be brought > back to life. Either we do it by running the BIOS code > (probably what you are talking about and should be > deprecated), or the driver "knows" how to restore the chip > from power off. I don't know if APM/ACPI provides other ways, > I suspect the APM BIOS will re-POST the card by itself or > else, things wouldn't work today. I don't know about ACPI. > > What I mean here is that none of our drivers know how to bring > back a chip as complicated as a radeon or a nvidia up from > power off, this requires intimate knowledge of the chip > internals, the way it's wired on a given board, etc...
All I am saying is that on Windows, the driver gets no help from the BIOS, APM, or ACPI, but yet it restores the video to full working condition. I understand that this sounds complicated, but since there is an implementation that already does this then I think we have to assume it's possible. :) Perhaps we should start with older, simpler gfx hw, or maybe POST the bios, but only as an interim solution until gfx drivers get better in this area.
Regards -- Andy - 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/
| |