Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] drm, coreboot: Add DRM coreboot driver

[Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>]

On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 10:19:03AM +0100, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Am 16.01.26 um 10:13 schrieb Tzung-Bi Shih:
> > On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 08:57:10AM +0100, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> > > Coreboot implements framebuffer support via simple-framebuffer. Provide a
> > > dedicated DRM driver. Keep the simple-framebuffer code for now.
> > > 
> > > For each firmware's provided framebuffer, we prefer a dedicated DRM driver
> > > tailored towards the platform's feature set. The coreboot framebuffer
> > > device currently creates a simple-framebuffer device for the provided
> > > framebuffer aperture. But simple-framebuffer is for DeviceTree nodes; not
> > > for coreboot. The simple-framebuffer infrastructure should be phased out
> > > for non-DT use cases. Coreboot is one of the final users of the code
> > > (besides n64).
> > > 
> > > Patches 1 to 5 start by fixing problems in the coreboot framebuffer
> > > implementation. There is a possible dangling pointer, the memory is
> > > marked as busy, the device hierarchy is incorrect, and a few minor things.
> > > 
> > > Patches 6 to 9 prepare the coreboot support for use by external drivers.
> > > Specifically, structures for the entries os the coreboot payload table
> > > have to be exported.
> > > 
> > > Patches 10 to 12 add corebootdrm, a DRM driver for the new
> > > coreboot-framebuffer platform device. Corebootdrm follows the pattern
> > > established by similar drivers. It also uses the same sysfb helpers. It
> > > is therefore fairly small. With patch 11, it has feature parity with
> > > simpledrm on the old simple-framebuffer. Patch 12 adds support for panel-
> > > orientation flags that coreboot makes available.
> > What would you suggest to submit the patches (e.g., which patches submit
> > through which tree)?  Do they have build-time dependencies?
> 
> The patches have no dependencies besides the coreboot and DRM frameworks
> they operate in. DRM moves a lot faster than coreboot, and you likely don't
> have the latest DRM in the coreboot tree. So I'd take them via DRM, if
> possible.

Let's take this way.  I'll try to review the patches and provide my A-b tag
too if possible.

> Note that there will be at least one more update to this series to address
> review comments.

Sure, no rush.