Hi
Am 25.07.23 um 03:12 schrieb suijingfeng:
Hi,
On 2023/7/25 02:34, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
Hi
Am 18.07.23 um 07:40 schrieb suijingfeng:
Hi,
Actually, I'm only a little bit worry about the ast_pm_thaw() code
path.
|- ast_pm_thaw()
|-- ast_drm_thaw()
|--- ast_post_gpu()
I'm not
Hi,
On 2023/7/25 02:34, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
Hi
Am 18.07.23 um 07:40 schrieb suijingfeng:
Hi,
Actually, I'm only a little bit worry about the ast_pm_thaw() code
path.
|- ast_pm_thaw()
|-- ast_drm_thaw()
|--- ast_post_gpu()
I'm not quite sure what mean here, because the post-GPU
Hi
Am 18.07.23 um 07:40 schrieb suijingfeng:
Hi,
Actually, I'm only a little bit worry about the ast_pm_thaw() code path.
|- ast_pm_thaw()
|-- ast_drm_thaw()
|--- ast_post_gpu()
I'm not quite sure what mean here, because the post-GPU code is not
involved in this patch. All this patch do
Hi,
Actually, I'm only a little bit worry about the ast_pm_thaw() code path.
|- ast_pm_thaw()
|-- ast_drm_thaw()
|--- ast_post_gpu()
Except this, all other code path have pci_enable_device() or
pcim_enable_device() called.
So, this patch seems OK.
On 2023/7/12 21:08, Thomas Zimmermann
Hi,
I have tested this patch on my x86-64(i3-8100, H110 D4L board) + ast2400
discrete BMC card just now,
drm/ast still works on normal case.
But originally this function is called in ast_post_gpu() function.
ast_post_gpu() doesn't happen on my test case.
I know something about the POST
