[Pm-utils] [PATCH] parse video quirks in uswsusp sleep module
mbiebl at gmail.com
Sun Mar 16 20:26:30 PDT 2008
2008/3/17, Victor Lowther <victor.lowther at gmail.com>:
> On Mon, 2008-03-17 at 03:26 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > 2008/3/17, Michael Biebl <mbiebl at gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > I actually think, that the QUIRK_NONE tests in 99video could/should
> > > also be removed.
> > >
> > > As said, combinations like --quirk-none --quirk-vbe-mode are simply invalid.
> > Or put in other words: The correct behaviour would be to abort the
> > suspend if such
> > invalid quirk combinations are given (and not to clear other quirks if
> > --quirk-none is present).
> > There currently isn't support in pm-utils to abort a suspend from
> > within a hook or a module (and rollback correctly), though. So, the
> > safest thing for now, is to simply ignore QUIRK_NONE, imho.
> I understand your position, but I have to disagree. Here is a scenario:
> My primary laptop is a Dell Latitude D820. When Dell was selling them,
> they could be purchased with 2 types of video cards:
> Intel 945 GMA
> nVidia GeForce 7400 Go
> That gives us a few different drivers options:
> Intel video driver
> nv open-source video driver
> nvidia binary driver
Honestly, I don't really care for proprietary drivers, but I
understand your needs.
> The whitelist from s2ram specifies that the D820 requires the vbe_post
> quirk and the vbe_mode quirk. The HAL quirks list specifies just the
> vbe_mode hack.
> I run the nvidia binary drivers, and if I allow either of those quirks
> to happen the system will hardlock.
> On those rare occasions when I have used the nv open-source drivers it
> has not survived a suspend/resume either. I have no particular desire
> to further troubleshoot this particular scenario -- the nv drivers are
> unsuitable for my system (they cannot driver my flatpanel at 1920x1200
> without video corruption).
> I don't have access to a D820 with the Intel graphics drivers, but I
> suspect the quirks in the s2ram whitelist are written to cover that
> particular hardware combination.
> This would not be such a big deal if it was easy to tell s2ram or the
> HAL quirks list what to do on X system with Y video hardware and Z video
> driver -- I would patch my local copy of the HAL quirks list and submit
> a new quirks entry covering that combination. Problem is, the HAL
> quirks list only appear to look at system mfgr/make/model -- I have not
> been able to find an exmaple of anything more complicated, and the docs
> on the fd.o HAL quirks list are lacking on how to write a new quirk that
> can express all the conditions I need to express.
Richard can probably give you more insight on this.
> Asking an end-user to write their own quirk entry
> in /usr/share/hal/fdi/information would be a great way to drive people
> away from Linux.
Imho it's much worse to provide several different ways to do the same thing.
I don't think it's that hard to cp the fdi file from
/usr/share/hal/fdi into /etc/hal/fdi and simply change the quirks for
Especially as this is very well documented.
> The easiest thing for me to do as a service to the end users is to make
> it easy for them to override HAL when it is getting it wrong. The
> current quirk_none is not the best way of doing that, but it is loads
> easier to say either of
> now, type 'echo video >>/etc/pm/blacklist'
> now, type 'echo --quirk-none >>/etc/pm/parameters'
As I explained in my earlier mail, this only allows to clear the
quirks, not override them. In case you need --quirk-s3-bios, it's not
With a hal fdi file in /etc/ you can easily achieve this.
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?
More information about the Pm-utils