Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 22:55:01 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Stefan Blachmann <sblachmann@gmail.com> Cc: Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com>, Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Reasons for keeping sc(4) and libvgl ? Message-ID: <CANCZdfoRCB5RuszKWTQazRuseRnapVqMTANnQTR0b61AHw54aQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CACc-My0q-Ods_O-TDru=tEwjSOaUJZZd=ZTzD46nY1gjGYO_VA@mail.gmail.com> References: <20211126160454.3eb827365a02103169ab9adc@bidouilliste.com> <20220621201924.e9b96876c947140ac1f3b7a4@bidouilliste.com> <3d09c86a-9840-f8bf-4725-8098d958a01d@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl> <202206211901.25LJ1uBd067376@critter.freebsd.dk> <CAPyFy2Ca83X042jc5QE-g=eHAfnukHScrTSyaLRi4UxeTBasJQ@mail.gmail.com> <20220622044923.6e2fac81c1e8205872d9de11@bidouilliste.com> <CACc-My0q-Ods_O-TDru=tEwjSOaUJZZd=ZTzD46nY1gjGYO_VA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--00000000000071ecd805e202242c Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Jun 21, 2022, 9:47 PM Stefan Blachmann <sblachmann@gmail.com> wrote: > I would kindly ask to stop pushing for removal of sc. > It will die soon enough if it doesn't become giant locked soon... Warner At least these long-running vt issues should be solved before removal of sc > should be considered at all: > 1. Currently vt BREAKS suspend/resume on nvidia and many other video > cards, which just work fine with sc > 2. vt does not support DPMS > 3. plenty other lesser bugs > Both things are valid reasons why many people - including me - reject > using vt on nvidia cards, because using it would factually downgrade the > computers' capabilities and energy efficiency. > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 4:50 AM Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> > wrote: > >> On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 21:23:42 -0400 >> Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> wrote: >> >> > On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 15:02, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> >> wrote: >> > > >> > > But the operative word there is "still", isn't it ? >> > > >> > > There is nothing which prevents vt(4) from doing the right thing is >> there ? >> > >> > Just a simple matter of programming. We should indeed add dpms support >> to vt. >> > >> >> I don't think so. >> 1/ It's useless when you boot with uefi which 100% of the machines >> produced in the last 5 (10?) years do >> 2/ If you really want to save power, use drm with the appropriate >> driver. Even without runtime power management just loading the driver >> will reduce power consumption on most machines. >> >> -- >> Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> <manu@FreeBSD.org> >> >> --00000000000071ecd805e202242c Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"auto"><div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" = class=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, Jun 21, 2022, 9:47 PM Stefan Blachmann <<a = href=3D"mailto:sblachmann@gmail.com">sblachmann@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br= ></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-= left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I would kindly = ask to stop pushing for removal of sc.</div></div></blockquote></div></div>= <div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">It will die soon enough if it= doesn't become giant locked soon...</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><= div dir=3D"auto">Warner=C2=A0</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"= auto"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D= "margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D= "ltr"><div>At least these long-running vt issues should be solved before re= moval of sc should be considered at all:<br></div><div>1. Currently vt BREA= KS suspend/resume on nvidia and many other video cards, which just work fin= e with sc<br></div><div>2. vt does not support DPMS</div><div>3. plenty oth= er lesser bugs<br></div><div>Both things are valid reasons why many people = - including me - reject using vt on nvidia cards, because using it would fa= ctually downgrade the computers' capabilities and energy efficiency.<br= ></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail= _attr">On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 4:50 AM Emmanuel Vadot <<a href=3D"mailto= :manu@bidouilliste.com" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"noreferrer">manu@bidouilli= ste.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"= margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-lef= t:1ex">On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 21:23:42 -0400<br> Ed Maste <<a href=3D"mailto:emaste@freebsd.org" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D= "noreferrer">emaste@freebsd.org</a>> wrote:<br> <br> > On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 15:02, Poul-Henning Kamp <<a href=3D"mailto:= phk@phk.freebsd.dk" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"noreferrer">phk@phk.freebsd.dk= </a>> wrote:<br> > ><br> > > But the operative word there is "still", isn't it ?= <br> > ><br> > > There is nothing which prevents vt(4) from doing the right thing = is there ?<br> > <br> > Just a simple matter of programming. We should indeed add dpms support= to vt.<br> > <br> <br> =C2=A0I don't think so.<br> =C2=A01/ It's useless when you boot with uefi which 100% of the machine= s<br> produced in the last 5 (10?) years do<br> =C2=A02/ If you really want to save power, use drm with the appropriate<br> driver. Even without runtime power management just loading the driver<br> will reduce power consumption on most machines.<br> <br> -- <br> Emmanuel Vadot <<a href=3D"mailto:manu@bidouilliste.com" target=3D"_blan= k" rel=3D"noreferrer">manu@bidouilliste.com</a>> <manu@FreeBSD.org>= ;<br> <br> </blockquote></div> </blockquote></div></div></div> --00000000000071ecd805e202242c--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfoRCB5RuszKWTQazRuseRnapVqMTANnQTR0b61AHw54aQ>