From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 03:16:00 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] video: implement a simple framebuffer driver Message-Id: <516387F0.7080602@wwwdotorg.org> List-Id: 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 04/08/2013 06:16 PM, 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 wouldn't be at all surprised if others want to feed it platform data rather than parameterizing it through device tree. All my platforms use DT though, so I didn't want to add that support without any user; it'd just be dead code for now. But, if someone wants that, I can certainly code it up or test/review after the change etc.