On Tue 2006-09-12 14:14:30, Jim Gettys wrote: > On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 11:21 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > Ok, so what is needed is message to X "we are suspending", and X needs > > to respond "okay, I'm ready, no need for console switch". > > This presumes an external agent to X controlling the fast > suspend/resume, with messages having to flow to and from X, and to and > from the kernel, with the kernel in the middle. > > Another simpler option is X itself just telling the kernel to suspend > without console switch, as the handoff of the display to the DCON chip > has to be done with X and with an interrupt signaling completion of the > handoff. This would be triggered by an inactivity timeout in the X > server. Whoa... that's a hack.. but yes, you can probably do that, and I think kernel even has neccessary interfaces already. (They were needed for uswsusp). > > Alternatively, hack kernel to take control from X without actually > > switching consoles. That should be possible even with current > > interface. > > This would require saving/restoring all graphics state in the kernel > (and X already has that state internally). Feasible, but seems like Hmm, save/restore graphics state from the kernel would of course be clean solution, but you should have that anyway... what if someone suspends without X running? And of course you can just cheat, and not do kernel save-state on your system. 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-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
