Re: Fwd: [PATCH 1/2] Framebuffer split

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 12:06:17AM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> Removed parts which are purely moving code around (of course it will
> be restored on commit).

This is not a full review of the patch, just a quick overview.  But I have
a few comments:

  - The "fb" naming is confusing.  "framebuffer" refers to a Linux API
    exported to userland on GNU/Linux, but it seems to be used for
    referring to the backend.  I think it's better if we call it just
    that ("backend").  Or maybe "driver" but that doesn't apply well to
    vbe.

  - Some copyright years need updating (I noticed video_fb.h, but please
    review the other files as well).

  - It'd help if the patch could actually be split in standalone parts
    that can be committed separately.  Maybe this is not possible, but
    at least for some parts of it, it probably is.

-- 
Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."