On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > Doesn't it seem wrong to _everyone_ else that making a basic > > kernel mechanism like "echo ... >/sys/power/state" work, some > > out of tree code appears to be needed? > > Bringing up video hardware needs x86 emulator (yes, s2ram is ugly on > PC)... I'd prefer to keep that out of tree. I think requiring X to reinitialize the screen for us is perfectly fine. One of the reasons I wanted to get netconsole working is that on many modern laptops, networking really does end up being the "simplest" device. Graphics is complex as hell (and on the Mac Mini, even doing a video BIOS init sequence doesn't even work - it has no video bios even with the firmware updated to look more like a PC, it's normally initialized by EFI). KeithP tells me that it's not even Mac Mini specific, and that some normal laptops will resume similarly video-bios-less. And serial is obviously gone, and its replacement (USB) is one of the biggest problems to initialize fully, and nobody expects it to be up until fairly late. Which literally leaves networking as existing on just about everything these days. It is also usually well-documented (network chip manufacturers definitely want Linux to work on those things), and the drivers know how to initialize everything. So netconsole really _should_ be able to work fairly early on. I suspect most people prefer debugging over a network anyway (I know I do). Linus
