[PATCH RFC 0/4] drm/core: restore suspend/resume calbacks in KMS drm drivers

2014-10-03 Thread Russell King - ARM Linux
On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 01:39:21PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Andrzej Hajda wrote: > > But this is an issue closely connected with component framework. > > Component framework separates master component probe and drm device > > initialization. As a result PM

[PATCH RFC 0/4] drm/core: restore suspend/resume calbacks in KMS drm drivers

2014-10-03 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Andrzej Hajda wrote: > On 10/03/2014 10:31 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 10:24:09AM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote: >>> The main intent of this patchset is to allow use of suspend/resume drm >>> driver >>> callbacks in KMS drivers, as these

[PATCH RFC 0/4] drm/core: restore suspend/resume calbacks in KMS drm drivers

2014-10-03 Thread Andrzej Hajda
On 10/03/2014 10:31 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 10:24:09AM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote: >> The main intent of this patchset is to allow use of suspend/resume drm driver >> callbacks in KMS drivers, as these callbacks seems to me the best place >> to implement suspend/resume

[PATCH RFC 0/4] drm/core: restore suspend/resume calbacks in KMS drm drivers

2014-10-03 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 10:24:09AM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote: > The main intent of this patchset is to allow use of suspend/resume drm driver > callbacks in KMS drivers, as these callbacks seems to me the best place > to implement suspend/resume functionality in drm driver. > Implementing this

[PATCH RFC 0/4] drm/core: restore suspend/resume calbacks in KMS drm drivers

2014-10-03 Thread Andrzej Hajda
The main intent of this patchset is to allow use of suspend/resume drm driver callbacks in KMS drivers, as these callbacks seems to me the best place to implement suspend/resume functionality in drm driver. Implementing this functionality in master component driver PM ops is problematic as those