From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBB4B2C82 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2022 11:45:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 20QBfa3P018405; Wed, 26 Jan 2022 11:45:29 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : references : date : in-reply-to : message-id : mime-version : content-type; s=pp1; bh=lVqDhrvnWrGuSL53mC1c1JVNCqrWUAZFD8NYSkNdxZ8=; b=ZR5diKuuG4vsmtZG11w0wcV2DhbnMee0WUa0chyJptnoKjvvqR/vFPe8SfdaokINFRve 89i0z4eBZIrna1YlWgvhLV0AcHeV2xyNWvn/7qZZ//Wod3doHmreSKcCEsqbOzJV/mT/ Gs/0m9LVbfpWo5lHtJRMSCaWr3U2KsF2b+Maf3uZmwIJiY5d99j5zkIcTz/s70/SC8BH Hk6QR10lom7J+rHkAS9UupWdDE6+RyDgBwnEPMg1w+aeX8tk1eXeucuYhfNz1sv7HDB4 +u4NMHS79RjRadzZ1oHeHS0C1x2vOUk4rT3Cwgw5Lh/L3pQfCGMgE8rOI372XaDfUISE xw== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3du5n401ua-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 26 Jan 2022 11:45:29 +0000 Received: from m0098419.ppops.net (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 20QBhOq6025478; Wed, 26 Jan 2022 11:45:28 GMT Received: from ppma04fra.de.ibm.com (6a.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.106]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3du5n401tu-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 26 Jan 2022 11:45:28 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 20QBh3r9021698; Wed, 26 Jan 2022 11:45:26 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay11.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.196]) by ppma04fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3dr9j9kt9u-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 26 Jan 2022 11:45:26 +0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 20QBjOoh44368276 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 26 Jan 2022 11:45:24 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DC314C04A; Wed, 26 Jan 2022 11:45:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88B744C052; Wed, 26 Jan 2022 11:45:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from tuxmaker.linux.ibm.com (unknown [9.152.85.9]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Wed, 26 Jan 2022 11:45:23 +0000 (GMT) From: Sven Schnelle To: Helge Deller Cc: Daniel Vetter , Javier Martinez Canillas , Andy Shevchenko , Thomas Zimmermann , Andy Shevchenko , linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, Michael Hennerich , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Phillip Potter , Carlis , Andy Shevchenko , Lee Jones , Heiner Kallweit Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] fbtft: Unorphan the driver for maintenance References: <20220125202118.63362-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <991e988b-7225-881b-a59a-33c3eae044be@suse.de> <3877516e-3db3-f732-b44f-7fe12b175226@gmx.de> <88ea01b8-3fdd-72cc-c3d8-e2890c68533b@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2022 12:45:23 +0100 In-Reply-To: <88ea01b8-3fdd-72cc-c3d8-e2890c68533b@gmx.de> (Helge Deller's message of "Wed, 26 Jan 2022 12:38:09 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: KhTGlHgQGrGYCalPGTfk1eZo6K604Rli X-Proofpoint-GUID: RJBF4AwI7_gWpF38_Wai-x95Bwn9_1-D X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.816,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.11.62.513 definitions=2022-01-26_03,2022-01-26_01,2021-12-02_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 clxscore=1011 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2201110000 definitions=main-2201260068 Helge Deller writes: > On 1/26/22 12:24, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> And that point was about 5 years ago, and has been discussed at some >> plumbers meanwhile, resulting in the staging TODO patches to make >> these drm drivers to destage them. >> >> Fixing bugs in fbdev is all fine, reopening it for merging new drivers is not. > > We are on the same page! > I'm not at all proposing to include new drivers for (relatively) new > hardware into fbdev, which is capable to be written as DRM driver. In my opinion that should be decided depending on the main usecase: If it's X11 or similar, it should go to DRM. If its main use case is kernel text console, it should go to fbdev. I think the main concern/trouble about fbdev is the userspace interface, and i personally would be totally fine seeing that go away (except the ability to change video mode with fbset). For me its important as kernel console for old systems, and don't want to run X11 on them. Given the ongoing discussion about performance and drm, i don't expect DRM gaining HW acceleration capabilities for text consoles. So i think both should exist, just for different usecases.