From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 09:56:31 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] video: implement a simple framebuffer driver
Message-Id: <2569832.XQDrhUGNaI@avalon>
List-Id: <linux-fbdev.vger.kernel.org>
References: <1365043183-28905-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
 <20130408171637.98b5ad1f867bcbda883af68b@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130408171637.98b5ad1f867bcbda883af68b@linux-foundation.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org

On Monday 08 April 2013 17:16:37 Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed,  3 Apr 2013 20:39:43 -0600 Stephen Warren wrote:
> > A simple frame-buffer describes a raw memory region that may be rendered
> > to, with the assumption that the display hardware has already been set
> > up to scan out from that buffer.
> > 
> > This is useful in cases where a bootloader exists and has set up the
> > display hardware, but a Linux driver doesn't yet exist for the display
> > hardware.
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > +config FB_SIMPLE
> > +	bool "Simple framebuffer support"
> > +	depends on (FB = y) && OF
> 
> It's sad that this simple little thing requires Open Firmware.  Could
> it be generalised in some way so that the small amount of setup info
> could be provided by other means (eg, module_param) or does the
> dependency go deeper than that?

I second that request. I like the idea of a simple framebuffer driver if it 
helps deprecating fbdev in the long term, but I don't want it to offer an 
excuse not to implement a DRM/KMS driver. In particular adding DT bindings 
would force us to keep supporting the ABI for a (too) long time.

> > +struct simplefb_format simplefb_formats[] = {
> > +	{ "r5g6b5", 16, {11, 5}, {5, 6}, {0, 5}, {0, 0} },
> > +};
> 
> I'll make this static.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart