From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 20 07:57:49 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9426106564A for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2011 07:57:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 824768FC1E for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2011 07:57:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from 63.imp.bsdimp.com (63.imp.bsdimp.com [10.0.0.63]) (authenticated bits=0) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p3K7pUIS066463 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 20 Apr 2011 01:51:31 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Warner Losh In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 01:51:30 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20110420003133.4dc391f6.taku@tackymt.homeip.net> <20110420004614.3099947d.taku@tackymt.homeip.net> To: Brandon Gooch X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1 (harmony.bsdimp.com [10.0.0.6]); Wed, 20 Apr 2011 01:51:34 -0600 (MDT) Cc: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move scsuspend()/scresume() forward to EVENTHANDLERs X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 07:57:49 -0000 On Apr 19, 2011, at 2:24 PM, Brandon Gooch wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Warner Losh wrote: >> Having chased boogiemen in this area before, I think this patch makes = good sense even though it breaks the device model a little. However, = the hardware in question really is special on x86... >>=20 >> Warner >=20 > Sorry Warner, would you mind elaborating on the above? Do you mean > that the patch moves to being too x86-specific for syscons handling? I mean that this device is special in the architecture, so having some = special code to cope with it is ok. Warner >=20 > Sorry if I'm being too dense. >=20 > -Brandon >=20 >> On Apr 19, 2011, at 12:48 PM, Brandon Gooch wrote: >>=20 >>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Taku YAMAMOTO = wrote: >>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:31:33 +0900 >>>> Taku YAMAMOTO wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> A patch is attached. >>>> Mailman ate it ;) >>>> Here it is. >>>>=20 >>>> -- >>>> -|-__ YAMAMOTO, Taku >>>> | __ < >>>>=20 >>>> - A chicken is an egg's way of producing more eggs. - >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Throughout testing, I've seen zero regressions. In fact, an issue = that >>> existed prior to this patch involving minor screen corruption (dirty >>> VGA buffers) is gone (Intel Mobile 965 Express). >>>=20 >>> Thank you so much guys! >>>=20 >>> -Brandon >=20 >=20