On Saturday 09 January 2010, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 16:06:59 -0800 > Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 16:01:46 -0800 (PST) > > Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > Commit cbda12d77ea590082edb6d30bd342a67ebc459e0 (drm/i915: > > > > implement new pm ops for i915), among other things, removed > > > > the .suspend and .resume pointers from the struct drm_driver > > > > object in i915_drv.c, which broke resume without KMS on my MSI > > > > Wind U100. > > > > > > > > Fix this by reverting that part of commit cbda12d77ea59. > > > > > > Hmm. I get the feeling that perhaps the of the drm_driver callbacks > > > was very muchintentional, and that the code presumably wants to be > > > called purely through the PCI layer, and not through the "drm class" > > > logic at all? > > > > > > Your patch seems like it would always execute the silly class > > > suspend even though we explicitly don't want to. And a much nicer > > > fix would seem to register the thing properly as a PCI driver even > > > if you don't then use KMS. > > > > > > So it looks to me like the problem is that drm_init() will register > > > the driver as a real PCI driver only if > > > > > > driver->driver_features & DRIVER_MODESET > > > > > > and otherwise it does that very odd "stealth mode manual scanning" > > > thing which doesn't register it as a proper PCI driver. > > > > > > So could we instead make that "disable KSM" _just_ disable the mode > > > setting part, not disable the "I'm a real driver" part? > > > > Yeah, but that would be more invasive. In the KMS case the driver > > (which is registered as PCI) does a lot of the initialization that the > > core takes care of in the non-KMS case, and some of it happens later > > at ioctl time. I'm afraid of that code since it seems like whenever > > you change something obvious it subtly breaks an old userland. > > Hm, maybe it's not as bad as I was afraid it was... we already support > i915.modeset=0 even on a KMS enabled driver, which should be fairly > equivalent. Rafael, if you build i915 with KMS enabled but modeset=0 > do you get the right suspend/resume behavior? No, with modeset=0 it doesn't register the PCI driver as well. Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
