On Tue, 2005-06-28 at 20:13 -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On 6/28/05, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > The callgate for getting to mode setting has to be in the kernel. That
> > > provides a standard API and a secure user-root transition. After the
> > > call is in the kerne
On 6/28/05, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The callgate for getting to mode setting has to be in the kernel. That
> > provides a standard API and a secure user-root transition. After the
> > call is in the kernel each driver can choose to satisfy the call
> > in-kernel or
> The callgate for getting to mode setting has to be in the kernel. That
> provides a standard API and a secure user-root transition. After the
> call is in the kernel each driver can choose to satisfy the call
> in-kernel or use something like call_userhelper() to do the work in
> user space.
As
On 6/28/05, Dave Airlie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > I can also predict the probable outcome on kernel submission if we use
> > the stub to start building suspend/resume in two different places -
> > DRM and fbdev.
>
> My stub isn't your totally fb in the stub, we are only going to put
>
>
> I can also predict the probable outcome on kernel submission if we use
> the stub to start building suspend/resume in two different places -
> DRM and fbdev.
My stub isn't your totally fb in the stub, we are only going to put
initially interrupt handling, suspend/resume, PCI driver handling a
On 6/28/05, Dave Airlie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Is anyone working on a stub driver ??
> >
> > While you wait on the great stub debate to be settled (it has been
> > going on for about 18 months with no action) why not simply fix
> > intelfb to work right on the i915?
>
> I've said this
> > Is anyone working on a stub driver ??
>
> While you wait on the great stub debate to be settled (it has been
> going on for about 18 months with no action) why not simply fix
> intelfb to work right on the i915?
I've said this before I think, but intelfb is very broken, apart from the
fact it
On 6/28/05, Alan Hourihane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> O.k. I've yanked the code from CVS for this now, as I don't want to pollute
> things if they're not going to work properly.
>
> Is anyone working on a stub driver ??
While you wait on the great stub debate to be settled (it has been
going on
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 12:09:52PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-06-24 at 09:58 -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
> > On 6/24/05, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I'm update with your changes this morning. I'm still seeing this at
> > > system shutdown. I modprobe drm,radeon a
On Fri, 2005-06-24 at 09:58 -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On 6/24/05, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm update with your changes this morning. I'm still seeing this at
> > system shutdown. I modprobe drm,radeon and then unloaded them (no
> > errors) then shut the system down.
>
> With some
On 6/24/05, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm update with your changes this morning. I'm still seeing this at
> system shutdown. I modprobe drm,radeon and then unloaded them (no
> errors) then shut the system down.
With some more experiments, it only happens with radeonfb loaded. You
also
I'm update with your changes this morning. I'm still seeing this at
system shutdown. I modprobe drm,radeon and then unloaded them (no
errors) then shut the system down.
EIP:0060:[]Not tainted VLI
EFLAGS: 00010246 (2.6.12)
EIP is at sysdev_shutdown+0xbd/0xd2
eax: 6b6b6b47 ebx: f9a904c0
Someone has logged a bug (#3549) that might be the cause. I've just not
had time to investigate this yet.
If no-one beats me to it, I'll take a look early next week.
Alan.
On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 04:45:48PM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
> Something in CVS is corrupting memory and causing various failu
Something in CVS is corrupting memory and causing various failures. My
suspicion it is related to the power management code but I haven't
been able to track it down. It is possible that this is related.
On 6/23/05, Thomas Hellström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From bug 3609:
>
> I don't think t
14 matches
Mail list logo
