[PATCH 02/13] fbdev: add remove_conflicting_pci_framebuffers()
daniel at ffwll.ch
Wed Nov 29 09:56:34 UTC 2017
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:30:30PM +0000, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:32:38PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:22:17AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 08:52:19PM +0000, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:27:59AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 06:53:31PM +0100, Michał Mirosław wrote:
> > > > > > Almost all drivers using remove_conflicting_framebuffers() wrap it with
> > > > > > the same code. Extract common part from PCI drivers into separate
> > > > > > remove_conflicting_pci_framebuffers().
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux at rere.qmqm.pl>
> > > > >
> > > > > Since the only driver that seems to use this is the staging one, which imo
> > > > > is a DOA project, not sure it's worth to bother with this here.
> > > >
> > > > afaik, this device is used in production by few manufacturers and it is
> > > > usefull for them to have it in the tree and the only reason it is still
> > > > in staging is because Tomi announced he will not take any new drivers in
> > > > fbdev. And, so I have not taken the initiative to properly move it out
> > > > of staging. I think Bartlomiej will also not accept new drivers in fbdev.
> > >
> > > Imo, if no one cares about porting it to kms (which will give you an fbdev
> > > driver for free), then we should throw it out. At least I thought staging
> > > was only for stuff that had a reasonable chance to get mainlined. Not as a
> > > dumping ground for drivers that people use, but don't bother to get ready
> > > for mainline.
> > >
> > > Greg?
> > Yes, if no one is working to get it out of staging, that means no one
> > cares about it, and it needs to be removed from the tree.
> Agreed. I was not working on getting it out of staging as there is no
> place for it to go.
> But, Teddy Wang told me that they have a working drm driver for it, but
> it is not atomic like Daniel was asking for. If it is ok, then I can send
> in a patch to remove the existing sm750 from staging and add the new sm750
> drm driver to staging. And after it is ready, we can go ahead with moving
> it out of staging to drm.
Please keep the todo item that it needs to be converted to atomic. And
tbh, it's probably faster if you just submit it to dri-devel, assuming you
have time to work on it. For small drivers we tend to be fairly quick in
getting them into good enough shape.
Staging is also a major pain for drm subsystem refactorings, I really,
really, really prefer we don't add more than the vbox pain we have
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
More information about the amd-gfx