From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755101Ab0IVTOr (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:14:47 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:48462 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754200Ab0IVTOq (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:14:46 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 20:14:43 +0100 (BST) From: James Simmons To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Bruno_Pr=E9mont?= cc: Florian Tobias Schandinat , Linux Fbdev development list , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Bernie Thompson Subject: Re: [Patch, RFC] Make struct fb_info ref-counted with kref In-Reply-To: <20100922203927.6ff60f7b@neptune.home> Message-ID: References: <20100919172833.14bf291e@neptune.home> <4C963E99.9080207@gmx.de> <20100919190240.65762511@neptune.home> <4C97B079.8050707@gmx.de> <20100920213258.1218b284@neptune.home> <4C97BF40.6030708@gmx.de> <20100920223608.19b4d177@neptune.home> <4C97E00B.6090103@gmx.de> <20100921075610.1c016c12@pluto.restena.lu> <4C985309.5020205@gmx.de> <20100921090255.410da2d7@pluto.restena.lu> <20100922203927.6ff60f7b@neptune.home> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > On Wed, 22 September 2010 James Simmons wrote: > > > This year someone said he/she would look at making it possible to have > > > multiple concurrently active consoles on distinct framebuffers. > > > Hopefully something is happening on that front (that would certainly > > > also include some fbcon cleanup) > > > > That would be me. > > Thanks for showing up (I didn't find the matching thread, probably > subject and my search terms were no good friends :) No problem. > > I have a tree at > > > > http://git.infradead.org/users/jsimmons/linuxconsole-2.6.git > > > > but currently fbcon is broken so I'm tracing down the problem. > > Thanks for the reference to your tree! > > What's you opinion regarding my changes to fbcon in my RFC patch? > Are they ok or would you prefer having fbcon changed to stop peeking > at registered_fb list and just operate directly on fb_info everywhere > it needs it? (that is let con2fb_map[] point to fb_info instead of > indexes into registered_fb? (I have a preference for the second one > and will try it out) I'm aiming to kill off registered_fb. I agree that fb_info should be used directly and we can avoid the ref-count. As for con2fb_map that is a little more complex.