Re: apm_emulation regression

2007-12-14 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Friday, 14 of December 2007, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > It can use the new notifier that happens before freezing yes. Johannes, > > > I think that's pretty much what my old powermac implementation did > > > (using my private notifier scheme I had there), might be worth reviving > > > that bit

Re: apm_emulation regression

2007-12-14 Thread Johannes Berg
> > It can use the new notifier that happens before freezing yes. Johannes, > > I think that's pretty much what my old powermac implementation did > > (using my private notifier scheme I had there), might be worth reviving > > that bit and sticking it into the generic apm_emu ... > > Note that yo

Re: apm_emulation regression

2007-12-13 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Wednesday, 12 of December 2007, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 13:45 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > I only just noticed a huge regression that was introduced when we moved > > PowerPC to the generic APM emulation code instead of our own. I'm in > > large part to blame

Re: apm_emulation regression

2007-12-13 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 01:10 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Hmm. > > I'm not that familiar with the APM emulation code, but the description > of the > problem above suggests that the APM emulation can install a suspend > notifier for this purpose. It can use the new notifier that happens be

Re: apm_emulation regression

2007-12-13 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 11:04 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 01:10 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > Hmm. > > > > I'm not that familiar with the APM emulation code, but the description > > of the > > problem above suggests that the APM emulation can install a su

Re: apm_emulation regression

2007-12-13 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 12:40 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > That basically means X will break. That's why X broke on the latest > > > ubuntu until I whacked some new scripts in them to force console > > > switching, among other things. Possibly other apps that relied > > > on /dev/apm_bios to be

Re: apm_emulation regression

2007-12-13 Thread Johannes Berg
> > That basically means X will break. That's why X broke on the latest > > ubuntu until I whacked some new scripts in them to force console > > switching, among other things. Possibly other apps that relied > > on /dev/apm_bios to be notified of system suspend/resume broke as well. > > Ah. I gue

Re: apm_emulation regression

2007-12-12 Thread Johannes Berg
On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 13:45 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > I only just noticed a huge regression that was introduced when we moved > PowerPC to the generic APM emulation code instead of our own. I'm in > large part to blame since I acked the patch... > > Basically, what we lost is the mec

apm_emulation regression

2007-12-11 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
I only just noticed a huge regression that was introduced when we moved PowerPC to the generic APM emulation code instead of our own. I'm in large part to blame since I acked the patch... Basically, what we lost is the mechanism for notifying user applications and waiting for their ACK before proc