From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: leonard.crestez@nxp.com (Leonard Crestez) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 20:58:06 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] drm: mxsfb: Change driver.name to mxsfb-drm In-Reply-To: References: <47ea7572011735b68a8a70f0e11bdf00cb2fd86a.1529091248.git.leonard.crestez@nxp.com> Message-ID: <07be6d9a85b6be655fc2b084be81d8bf9715b57a.camel@nxp.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, 2018-06-15 at 16:47 -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 4:43 PM, Leonard Crestez > wrote: > > The FBDEV driver uses the same name and both can't be registered at the > > same time. Fix this by renaming the drm driver to mxsfb-drm > > > > Signed-off-by: Leonard Crestez > > Stefan sent the same patch a few days ago: > http://www.spinics.net/lists/dri-devel/msg179489.html In that thread there is a proposal for removing the old fbdev/mxsfb driver entirely. That would break old DTBs, isn't this generally considered bad? Also, are we sure the removal of fbdev/mxsfb wouldn't lose any features? What my series does is make both drivers work with the same kernel image and turns the choice into a board-level dtb decision. Supporting everything at once seems desirable to me and it allows for a very smooth upgrade path. The old driver could be removed later, after all users are converted. -- Regards, Leonard