From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Petr Vandrovec" Subject: Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH]: EDID parser Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 15:05:54 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <4D87862358@vcnet.vc.cvut.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Return-path: List-Id: Cc: James Simmons , Linux Fbdev development list , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 3 Apr 03 at 14:38, Sven Luther wrote: > On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 12:05:13PM +0100, Petr Vandrovec wrote: > > No. With matroxfb, you have two framebuffer devices, /dev/fb0 & /dev/fb1, > > which can be connected to any of three outputs: analog primary, analog > > secondary and DVI. Analog primary & DVI share same pair of DDC cables, > > and analog secondary has its own... And user can interconnect fb* with > > outputs in almost any way he wants, as long as hardware supports it. > > Mmm, i have not been into fbdev much lately, but for my X devel work, i > believe thta it is a good thing to separate the framebuffer issues from > the output issues, and thus, for the card i have at least, have one > function where the per chip things are done (memory detection, bypass > unit handling, framebuffer and memory management) and another set of > functions which would be head, that is output, specific. This way, you > would configure the /dev/fbx and when the user which to use this or that > output, the DDC will be connected to the output, not the framebuffer. > This seems a reasonable way of doing this and should solve your problem, > no ? Of course. But because of James decided that fbdev layer will automatically choose appropriate resolution only from xres/yres, I need to have monitor capabilities at the time upper layer asks to set videomode on /dev/fbx... And it just sets it on /dev/fbx, leaving out both VTs (so I cannot remember what mode was probed on each VT anymore) and outputs. Petr