Hi, On Tuesday, 27 February 2007 23:29, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > > > > (Looks like this is some sort of default that returned when system > > > > > > integrators are too lazy. Perhaps mainboard and BIOS release date > > > > > > also > > > > > > need to be used in these circumstances?) > > > > > > > > > > Patch would be welcome ;-). > > > > > > > > No. It proves more and more that DMI data is just not a reliable way to > > > > identify machines. We should probably move to use the PCI vendor, > > > > subvendor > > > > and device IDs of the Graphics card and maybe the root bridge or > > > > something > > > > like that. > > > > I will, however, not implement this, since we can do that very easily > > > > with > > > > HAL and HAL will just pass the correct options via pm-utils to s2ram. > > > > > > > > This will mean that the whitelist will move from s2ram to the hal-info > > > > package, but there is already a whitelist used by the distributions that > > > > do not use s2ram, and a unified solution will probably be the best long- > > > > term solution. > > > > > > > > All just my humble opinion, of course. If somebody wants to implement > > > > PCI-ID matching and maintain the whitelist for that, i will welcome > > > > this, > > > > too. I for myself am just allergic to duplicated work :-) > > > > > > I'd actually prefer to do it in s2ram... so that it works inside > > > init=/bin/bash. But feel free to steal^Wborrow hal's whitelist ;-). > > > > Well, I'm starting to wonder if we really really need the whitelist to be > > compiled into s2ram. In fact we only need to tell new users what s2ram > > options > > they should use for their machines. > > > > For example, if the docs say "please have a look into whitelist.txt to see > > what s2ram options are known to work with your machine" etc., we'll be able > > to maintain the whitelist as a separate document, IMHO, and the HAL or > > pm-tools > > people can use some more sophisticated whitelisting independently. > > Been there, done that, no I do not think it worked. See > Doc*/power/video.txt.
Well, IMHO, the current system doesn't seem to work very well either, because there are machines that we _can't_ whitelist, _although_ they work. Worse yet, we have some machines whitelisted, while there are some in the wild that are identified in the same way and don't work or require some other combination of options. This is getting a bit messy ... Rafael ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Suspend-devel mailing list Suspend-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/suspend-devel
