Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH] Framebuffer: 2nd try: client notification mecanism & PM

From: Pavel Machek (pavel@suse.cz)
Date: Thu Aug 07 2003 - 15:29:51 EST

Next message: Pavel Machek: "Re: [BROKEN PATCH] syscalls leak data via registers?"
Previous message: Pavel Machek: "Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH] Framebuffer: 2nd try: client notification mecanism & PM"
In reply to: James Simmons: "Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH] Framebuffer: 2nd try: client notification mecanism & PM"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi!

> > I believe solution to this is simple: always switch to kernel-owned
> > console during suspend. (swsusp does it, there's patch for S3 to do
> > the same). That way, Xfree (or qtopia or whoever) should clean up
> > after themselves and leave the console to the kernel. (See
> > kernel/power/console.c)
>
> Not very helpful on embedded systems that use the framebuffer without the
> VT console.

Okay, that might be a problem. But such system will need some special
notification... Is VT so much overhead?
Pavel

-- 
When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Pavel Machek: "Re: [BROKEN PATCH] syscalls leak data via registers?"
Previous message: Pavel Machek: "Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH] Framebuffer: 2nd try: client notification mecanism & PM"
In reply to: James Simmons: "Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH] Framebuffer: 2nd try: client notification mecanism & PM"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 07 2003 - 22:00:40 EST