From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2B5BC433EF for ; Thu, 5 May 2022 12:59:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1378413AbiEENCo (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 May 2022 09:02:44 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43386 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S242976AbiEENCm (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 May 2022 09:02:42 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x52b.google.com (mail-ed1-x52b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAEF054186 for ; Thu, 5 May 2022 05:59:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x52b.google.com with SMTP id be20so5077655edb.12 for ; Thu, 05 May 2022 05:59:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ffwll.ch; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=TdtdiuvZ8kL/hgc8dFK7GV8wDG6uaaKHXPWtyIXxhtg=; b=hXZ/pDovQSXNRx0IAnf+JAJh1h4umCs0GjzgB8qyT2sucQ6vbTH2Q+39inblU4gakn IzvRFdCufYweWPtGblHPsek8a2h/hJTuIlz34KfTJdFe6mtty2eOqXZb6oapAx2/iphd ChywpfpQhtj6kqglK59hJ6BWcHDmZSTO170x4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to; bh=TdtdiuvZ8kL/hgc8dFK7GV8wDG6uaaKHXPWtyIXxhtg=; b=VvV+VnIcu+OE3c0yezpVBvf7O+I/Wwb4dHSLeu92g1jkQ+BDUJSU+MVlcICpgAzEzS B2GMDsBAJwTUN107Kj3Jm4ulj04fUi1PVTLQyX81YK5LjmNrJ9DMkt28wSeCGbLZg+eo klAcUKrbZ035srkQmGhxK1FBSt+wn2dy6NL9YD47i74/SfkgsEivno3W9Cb/fCaXZpGk tgQraTyj+Fut+KzW6Bo/WjNdw2dftYmkuw9ZGntKdc3j/64cBTDBmkv5j2Ets3g8tydQ X+768dPcuJSki/o1JbI3EHRymZudIwkzGvQw2HYvju/mA1aH/7ND83dIedZ5KAWzJUn+ em/A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531ShGMUXtqaq+71lcle7auTghCwITjkhK/jWIU9t50acTEreehB lmPcvzjw4xWL3axPzbeNj9sZlA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyBYRoJ02j5Poqwbjoj0TCy918qe43XGFiHPEv1dUFaRY/4oF+mvaYj1nSndvSIV9S23+tVog== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:4396:b0:427:f2dc:b11 with SMTP id o22-20020a056402439600b00427f2dc0b11mr13167491edc.298.1651755542198; Thu, 05 May 2022 05:59:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phenom.ffwll.local ([2a02:168:57f4:0:efd0:b9e5:5ae6:c2fa]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j1-20020aa7de81000000b0042617ba63b3sm774202edv.61.2022.05.05.05.59.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 05 May 2022 05:59:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 5 May 2022 14:58:59 +0200 From: Daniel Vetter To: Javier Martinez Canillas Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Zimmermann , Laurent Pinchart , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] drm: Allow simpledrm to setup its emulated FB as firmware provided Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Javier Martinez Canillas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Zimmermann , Laurent Pinchart , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org References: <20220503071540.471667-1-javierm@redhat.com> <20220503071540.471667-4-javierm@redhat.com> <47d3a7f6-24f9-7d54-48bf-09ab9e40e2de@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47d3a7f6-24f9-7d54-48bf-09ab9e40e2de@redhat.com> X-Operating-System: Linux phenom 5.10.0-8-amd64 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 02:45:27PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > Hello Daniel, > > On 5/5/22 14:11, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > [snip] > > >> > >> And while I agree with you that these midlayer flags are horrible, that is > >> what any other fbdev that makes use of a firmware-provided framebuffer set, > >> so simpledrm emulated fbdev shouldn't be the exception IMO. > > > > So we discussed this a pile more on irc, and at least my take is that > > people who run simpledrm but want to combine that with fbdev drivers and > > expect it to all work nicely we can probably ignore. At least until all > > this sysfb stuff is nicely unified, and at that point we shouldn't need > > special flags anymore. > > I'm OK with this take and happy to just drop this patch-set then. My worry > was just that someone could complain that we broke their uncommon setup [0]. > > [0]: https://xkcd.com/1172/. Since you have to explicitly enable simpledrm and that combo never worked, we did not actually break anything. Me, who has over a decade experience legalesing around the "no regression" rule :-) -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch