[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] ACPI/Intel: Rework Opregion support

2011-03-15 Thread Olivier Galibert
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 01:32:40PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Opregion is one mechanism to provide VBT - it doesn't define it. Then let me repeat that I haven't seen anything in the VBT tables of the gma500-using netbook I have that didn't seem to be parsed correctly by the current gpu/drm/i9

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] ACPI/Intel: Rework Opregion support

2011-03-15 Thread Olivier Galibert
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 01:52:26AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Now that we've got multiple consumers it's probably not helpful to move > the (potentially chip-specific) VBT handling to general code. We've got > zero documentation on how GMA500 handles VBT, and not a great deal more > for i91

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] ACPI/Intel: Rework Opregion support

2011-03-15 Thread Matthew Garrett
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 02:40:59PM +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 01:32:40PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > Opregion is one mechanism to provide VBT - it doesn't define it. > > Then let me repeat that I haven't seen anything in the VBT tables of > the gma500-using netb

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] ACPI/Intel: Rework Opregion support

2011-03-15 Thread Matthew Garrett
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 02:30:55PM +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 01:52:26AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > Now that we've got multiple consumers it's probably not helpful to move > > the (potentially chip-specific) VBT handling to general code. We've got > > zero doc

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] ACPI/Intel: Rework Opregion support

2011-03-15 Thread Olivier Galibert
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 01:32:40PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Opregion is one mechanism to provide VBT - it doesn't define it. Then let me repeat that I haven't seen anything in the VBT tables of the gma500-using netbook I have that didn't seem to be parsed correctly by the current gpu/drm/i9

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] ACPI/Intel: Rework Opregion support

2011-03-15 Thread Olivier Galibert
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 01:52:26AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Now that we've got multiple consumers it's probably not helpful to move > the (potentially chip-specific) VBT handling to general code. We've got > zero documentation on how GMA500 handles VBT, and not a great deal more > for i91

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] ACPI/Intel: Rework Opregion support

2011-03-15 Thread Matthew Garrett
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 02:40:59PM +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 01:32:40PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > Opregion is one mechanism to provide VBT - it doesn't define it. > > Then let me repeat that I haven't seen anything in the VBT tables of > the gma500-using netb

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] ACPI/Intel: Rework Opregion support

2011-03-15 Thread Matthew Garrett
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 02:30:55PM +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 01:52:26AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > Now that we've got multiple consumers it's probably not helpful to move > > the (potentially chip-specific) VBT handling to general code. We've got > > zero doc