From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756561Ab0IWUvn (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:51:43 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:19446 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751990Ab0IWUvm (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:51:42 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.57,225,1283756400"; d="scan'208";a="840395430" Message-ID: <4C9BBDDD.6050803@linux.intel.com> Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 13:51:41 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Organization: Intel Open Source Technology Center User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100907 Fedora/3.1.3-1.fc13 Thunderbird/3.1.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "H. Peter Anvin" CC: Jan Engelhardt , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: "Glove box" BIOS patch causes boot flicker References: <4C994F0B.6030004@linux.intel.com> <4C9BB1C5.80808@zytor.com> <4C9BBD0C.6070905@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: <4C9BBD0C.6070905@zytor.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/23/2010 01:48 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 09/23/2010 01:46 PM, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >> >> On Thursday 2010-09-23 22:00, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>> On 09/23/2010 11:54 AM, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >>>> On Wednesday 2010-09-22 02:34, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>>> >>>>> There were some minor bugs (typos) in the conversion to the glove box >>>>> coding style. The ones we have found have been fixed, so the first >>>>> thing is to try the current mainline or the current tip tree. >>>>> Otherwise I would look for issues where either the wrong register is >>>>> changed, or something like a variable is changed instead of a field. >>>> >>>> I tried v2.6.36-rc5 now, and it looks better. The cursor position is >>>> retained as desired. The mode switch is still there, albeit much >>>> shorter than it used to be. >>> >>> The mode switch was there in the original code. >> >> That may very well be so, but there clearly is distinguished behavior >> w.r.t. that in 2.6.36 compared to .30. > > Yes, but that caused regressions from the old assembly code. > By the way, if you don't want a mode reset, use "vga=current". -hpa