[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200903242325.23483.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 23:25:22 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Export platform_pci_set_power_state() and make radeonfb use it
On Tuesday 24 March 2009, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-24 at 12:00 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > In fact I have yet another idea. If we use the "retransmission with exponential
> > backoff" algorithm in pci_raw_set_power_state(), we won't have to add any
> > extra parameters to pci_set_power_state() and the radeon case will be covered
> > automatically. That should also cover any other devices having similar
> > problems IMO.
> >
> > A patch to implement that is appended, please tell me what you think.
>
> This is crazy....
>
> Most devices don't need that and those who are a bit "touchy" may well
> puke on being written to too fast while they are in the middle of
> the transition.
>
> Let's wait to see if Alex from ATI has an answer here, and if not, I
> would suggest keeping the dirt inside radeonfb.
BTW, whatever you do inside of radeonfb will be based on specific assumptions
regarding how pci_set_power_state() works internally, which makes that
extremely fragile. This way you'll also make the core depend on the radeonfb
driver to some extent, which I don't think is desirable.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
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