Victor Lowther [2009-11-30 18:14 -0600]:
> That is exactly what I try to do, and performance is acceptable so
> far (assuming the quirks are translated in advance). I will actually
> profile it once I have reports from machines that actually require
> quirks.
Also, most machines nowadays will alre
On Nov 30, 2009, at 9:00 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello Victor,
>
> Victor Lowther [2009-11-25 8:43 -0600]:
>> No, it translates the .fdi files that are currently on the system
>> into a
>> native format that uses bash-style extended regular expressions
>> instead of
>> the .fdi ad-hoc patte
Hello Victor,
Victor Lowther [2009-11-25 8:43 -0600]:
> No, it translates the .fdi files that are currently on the system into a
> native format that uses bash-style extended regular expressions instead of
> the .fdi ad-hoc pattern matching scheme.
Ah, got it now. Since I am using KMS, the origi
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 09:58, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Victor Lowther [2009-11-26 21:44 -0600]:
>> Definitly -- we want to cut over to a native format anyways, so we would be
>> packaging up the quirks database separate from pm-utils and hal in any case
>> -- sorta like the way hal and hal-info are s
Victor Lowther [2009-11-26 21:44 -0600]:
> Definitly -- we want to cut over to a native format anyways, so we would be
> packaging up the quirks database separate from pm-utils and hal in any case
> -- sorta like the way hal and hal-info are separated.
Do you really think that's necessary? The fre
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Michael Biebl wrote:
> 2009/11/26 Dan Nicholson :
> > I think if this is really the way to go, then shell is not the right
> > tool for the job at runtime. You could write a trivial C program to
> > parse that out and spit out the quirks on stdout for pm-utils to
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Victor Lowther
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 6:10 AM, Martin Pitt
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello Victor,
> >>
> >> sorry for the late response; conference and all that..
> >>
> >> Victor Lowther [2009-11-
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Michael Biebl wrote:
> 2009/11/26 Dan Nicholson :
>> I think if this is really the way to go, then shell is not the right
>> tool for the job at runtime. You could write a trivial C program to
>> parse that out and spit out the quirks on stdout for pm-utils to use
2009/11/26 Dan Nicholson :
> I think if this is really the way to go, then shell is not the right
> tool for the job at runtime. You could write a trivial C program to
> parse that out and spit out the quirks on stdout for pm-utils to use.
> Bash is great, but it is not the right tool for all jobs.
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Victor Lowther
wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 6:10 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
>>
>> Hello Victor,
>>
>> sorry for the late response; conference and all that..
>>
>> Victor Lowther [2009-11-15 21:59 -0600]:
>> > And now, a version that actaully works. With a bit of
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 6:10 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello Victor,
>
> sorry for the late response; conference and all that..
>
> Victor Lowther [2009-11-15 21:59 -0600]:
> > And now, a version that actaully works. With a bit of glue code, this
> > can replace auto quirk and smart kernel driver
Hello Victor,
sorry for the late response; conference and all that..
Victor Lowther [2009-11-15 21:59 -0600]:
> And now, a version that actaully works. With a bit of glue code, this
> can replace auto quirk and smart kernel driver handling in pm-utils.
I just tried your script, but AFAIK it jus
On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 21:59 -0600, Victor Lowther wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 20:42 -0600, Victor Lowther wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 12:30 -0600, Victor Lowther wrote:
> > > On Nov 13, 2009, at 7:30 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello Victor, hello Richard, hello devkitters,
> > >
On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 20:42 -0600, Victor Lowther wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 12:30 -0600, Victor Lowther wrote:
> > On Nov 13, 2009, at 7:30 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Victor, hello Richard, hello devkitters,
> > >
> > > in the past half year we have come quite far with the "halse
On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 12:30 -0600, Victor Lowther wrote:
> On Nov 13, 2009, at 7:30 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
>
> > Hello Victor, hello Richard, hello devkitters,
> >
> > in the past half year we have come quite far with the "halsectomy",
> > i.e. deprecating hal [1]. The main two remaining items ar
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 12:35:36PM -0600, Victor Lowther wrote:
> You are writing off a lot of legacy hardware that is probably still in
> use, as well as everything that is not intel, radeon, or nvidia. The
> quirks database should stay in some form.
I don't see how legacy hardware fits into
On Nov 13, 2009, at 10:21 AM, Matthew Garrett
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 05:15:36PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
>
>> What is the current status of KMS for radeon and noveau? Is radeon
>> KMS
>> still marked as experimental?
>
> It's marked as experimental, but only because the ABI isn't
On Nov 13, 2009, at 7:30 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello Victor, hello Richard, hello devkitters,
>
> in the past half year we have come quite far with the "halsectomy",
> i.e. deprecating hal [1]. The main two remaining items are now X.org
> input devices (where a patch is already being discu
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 05:15:36PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> What is the current status of KMS for radeon and noveau? Is radeon KMS
> still marked as experimental?
It's marked as experimental, but only because the ABI isn't fixed yet.
It should work. nouveau KMS works fine, including suspend
2009/11/13 Matthew Garrett :
> Bear in mind that with current kernels, resume should work without
> quirks on all intel and radeon, and will basically never do anything
> useful on nvidia. These are very much a legacy holdover, and at this
> point I'd recommend dropping support for them entirely.
On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 15:03 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Bear in mind that with current kernels, resume should work without
> quirks on all intel and radeon, and will basically never do anything
> useful on nvidia. These are very much a legacy holdover, and at this
> point I'd recommend dropp
2009/11/13 Matthew Garrett :
> useful on nvidia. These are very much a legacy holdover, and at this
> point I'd recommend dropping support for them entirely. The market share
> of everyone else put together is miniscule, and if they're not
> interested in supporting Linux properly then we shouldn't
Bear in mind that with current kernels, resume should work without
quirks on all intel and radeon, and will basically never do anything
useful on nvidia. These are very much a legacy holdover, and at this
point I'd recommend dropping support for them entirely. The market share
of everyone else
Hello Victor, hello Richard, hello devkitters,
in the past half year we have come quite far with the "halsectomy",
i.e. deprecating hal [1]. The main two remaining items are now X.org
input devices (where a patch is already being discussed), and the
suspend quirks in pm-utils.
I would like to pus
24 matches
Mail list logo
