[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080528104250.GC5728@elf.ucw.cz>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 12:42:50 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: amd64-agp: resume but too late?
On Tue 2008-05-27 14:18:19, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 26 May 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I don't get it:
> >
> > --- a/drivers/char/agp/amd64-agp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/char/agp/amd64-agp.c
> > @@ -549,6 +549,8 @@ static int agp_amd64_suspend(struct pci_
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +/* FIXME: this is strange; we enable iommu translation here, but that
> > + * may be too late, no? */
> > static int agp_amd64_resume(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> > {
> > pci_set_power_state(pdev, PCI_D0);
> >
> > ...but resume is normal pci device, so other devices may be resumed
> > before this one, and already depend on iommu running...
> >
> > How is this supposed to work? Should agp_amd64_resume be called from
> > sysdev or something like that?
>
> Hmm, you sent a patch some days ago to change it to
> suspend_late/resume_early. Is the discussion resolved about that ?
I'm not aware of such patch. I don't think I sent it.
I did add suspend/resume support to pci-gart_64.c , which is
confusingly similar code. That patch needs a bit more testing, and
some de-uglyfication.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists