Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-06 Thread Pavel Machek
On Tue 2008-02-05 17:51:22, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> The asm() for making beeps really need to be moved to a function and >>> cleaned up (redone in C using inb()/outb()) if they are to be retained at >>> all. >> >> Yes, they are. For some people they're the only tool

Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-06 Thread Pavel Machek
On Tue 2008-02-05 17:51:22, H. Peter Anvin wrote: Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: The asm() for making beeps really need to be moved to a function and cleaned up (redone in C using inb()/outb()) if they are to be retained at all. Yes, they are. For some people they're the only tool to debug

Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-06 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Tuesday, 5 of February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: This rewrites wakeup code to .c, and it fixes stack (should use movl ,%esp, not movw). Testers wanted. Makefile infrastructure was done by hpa, cleanups by rjw. Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [--snip--] diff --git

Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-05 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Wednesday, 6 of February 2008, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> The asm() for making beeps really need to be moved to a function and > >> cleaned up (redone in C using inb()/outb()) if they are to be retained > >> at all. > > > > Yes, they are. For some people they're

Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-05 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: The asm() for making beeps really need to be moved to a function and cleaned up (redone in C using inb()/outb()) if they are to be retained at all. Yes, they are. For some people they're the only tool to debug broken resume. That's fine, but they should get cleaned

Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-05 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Wednesday, 6 of February 2008, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Tuesday, 5 of February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: > >> This rewrites wakeup code to .c, and it fixes stack (should use movl > >> ,%esp, not movw). Testers wanted. Makefile infrastructure was done by > >> hpa,

Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-05 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Tuesday, 5 of February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: This rewrites wakeup code to .c, and it fixes stack (should use movl ,%esp, not movw). Testers wanted. Makefile infrastructure was done by hpa, cleanups by rjw. I'll test it tomorrow and I still have some more

Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-05 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Tuesday, 5 of February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: > > This rewrites wakeup code to .c, and it fixes stack (should use movl > ,%esp, not movw). Testers wanted. Makefile infrastructure was done by > hpa, cleanups by rjw. I'll test it tomorrow and I still have some more cleanups (I was distracted

[rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-05 Thread Pavel Machek
This rewrites wakeup code to .c, and it fixes stack (should use movl ,%esp, not movw). Testers wanted. Makefile infrastructure was done by hpa, cleanups by rjw. Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> diff --git a/arch/x86/Makefile b/arch/x86/Makefile index 8978e98..949b8eb 100644 ---

[rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-05 Thread Pavel Machek
This rewrites wakeup code to .c, and it fixes stack (should use movl ,%esp, not movw). Testers wanted. Makefile infrastructure was done by hpa, cleanups by rjw. Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] diff --git a/arch/x86/Makefile b/arch/x86/Makefile index 8978e98..949b8eb 100644 ---

Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-05 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Tuesday, 5 of February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: This rewrites wakeup code to .c, and it fixes stack (should use movl ,%esp, not movw). Testers wanted. Makefile infrastructure was done by hpa, cleanups by rjw. I'll test it tomorrow and I still have some more cleanups (I was distracted by

Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-05 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Tuesday, 5 of February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: This rewrites wakeup code to .c, and it fixes stack (should use movl ,%esp, not movw). Testers wanted. Makefile infrastructure was done by hpa, cleanups by rjw. I'll test it tomorrow and I still have some more

Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-05 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Wednesday, 6 of February 2008, H. Peter Anvin wrote: Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Tuesday, 5 of February 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: This rewrites wakeup code to .c, and it fixes stack (should use movl ,%esp, not movw). Testers wanted. Makefile infrastructure was done by hpa, cleanups by

Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-05 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: The asm() for making beeps really need to be moved to a function and cleaned up (redone in C using inb()/outb()) if they are to be retained at all. Yes, they are. For some people they're the only tool to debug broken resume. That's fine, but they should get cleaned

Re: [rft] s2ram wakeup moves to .c, could fix few machines

2008-02-05 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Wednesday, 6 of February 2008, H. Peter Anvin wrote: Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: The asm() for making beeps really need to be moved to a function and cleaned up (redone in C using inb()/outb()) if they are to be retained at all. Yes, they are. For some people they're the only tool

<    1   2