From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: moinejf@free.fr (Jean-Francois Moine) Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 08:30:31 +0200 Subject: [RFC 0/8] rmk's Dove DRM/TDA19988 Cubox driver In-Reply-To: References: <20130516192510.GV18614@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20130517133345.7c1368f5@armhf> <20130517120115.GF18614@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20130517194023.0c385ea0@armhf> <20130519085920.GO18614@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20130520201536.GY18614@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20130521083031.48f1e43e@armhf> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, 20 May 2013 16:23:33 -0400 Alex Deucher wrote: > > Note also that the generic DRM KMS code assumes cursor support at > > 64x64, and there's no generic way for a driver at present (that I know > > of) to inform it of anything different. > > It shouldn't be too hard to add a new cap for querying the cursor size > to the drm cap interface. There was already a patch request for that, but the functions were surely useless. Otherwise, you may do a search on "largest cursor:" (xdpyinfo output). The results are surprising.. -- Ken ar c'henta? | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! ** Jef | http://moinejf.free.fr/