public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Matrox Kconfig
@ 2004-06-05 11:40 Roger Luethi
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Roger Luethi @ 2004-06-05 11:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Petr Vandrovec; +Cc: linux-kernel

The descriptions for CONFIG_FB_MATROX_G450 and CONFIG_FB_MATROX_G100A
in drivers/video/Kconfig (current 2.6) are confusing: Both want to be
selected for Matrox G100, G200, G400 based video cards.

In the menu, it's

# G100/G200/G400/G450/G550 support (sets FB_MATROX_G100, FB_MATROX_G450)
#	G100/G200/G400 support     (sets FB_MATROX_G100)
#	G400 second head support

where the second depends on the first _not_ being selected.

How about this instead?

# Gxxx (generic) (sets FB_MATROX_G100)
#	G400 second head (depends FB_MATROX_GXXX, FB_MATROX_I2C)
			 (sets FB_MATROX_G450)
#	G450/550 support (depends on FB_MATROX_GXXX)

Roger

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: Matrox Kconfig
@ 2004-06-07 17:43 Petr Vandrovec
  2004-06-07 17:59 ` Roger Luethi
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Petr Vandrovec @ 2004-06-07 17:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Roger Luethi; +Cc: linux-kernel

On  5 Jun 04 at 13:40, Roger Luethi wrote:
> The descriptions for CONFIG_FB_MATROX_G450 and CONFIG_FB_MATROX_G100A
> in drivers/video/Kconfig (current 2.6) are confusing: Both want to be
> selected for Matrox G100, G200, G400 based video cards.
> 
> In the menu, it's
> 
> # G100/G200/G400/G450/G550 support (sets FB_MATROX_G100, FB_MATROX_G450)
> #   G100/G200/G400 support     (sets FB_MATROX_G100)
> #   G400 second head support
> 
> where the second depends on the first _not_ being selected.
> 
> How about this instead?
> 
> # Gxxx (generic) (sets FB_MATROX_G100)
> #   G400 second head (depends FB_MATROX_GXXX, FB_MATROX_I2C)
>              (sets FB_MATROX_G450)
> #   G450/550 support (depends on FB_MATROX_GXXX)

Please no. It was this way in 2.4.x, and I was receiving at least
two complaints a week that their G450 does not work with their
system.

G400's second head has nothing to do with G450/G550, so there is
no reason why G400 second head should set FB_MATROX_G450...

If anything, then let's remove G100/G200/G400 choice completely,
making G450/G550 support unconditional.
                                            Petr Vandrovec


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: Matrox Kconfig
  2004-06-07 17:43 Matrox Kconfig Petr Vandrovec
@ 2004-06-07 17:59 ` Roger Luethi
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Roger Luethi @ 2004-06-07 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Petr Vandrovec; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:43:56 +0200, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
> On  5 Jun 04 at 13:40, Roger Luethi wrote:
> > The descriptions for CONFIG_FB_MATROX_G450 and CONFIG_FB_MATROX_G100A
> > in drivers/video/Kconfig (current 2.6) are confusing: Both want to be
> > selected for Matrox G100, G200, G400 based video cards.
> > 
> > In the menu, it's
> > 
> > # G100/G200/G400/G450/G550 support (sets FB_MATROX_G100, FB_MATROX_G450)
> > #   G100/G200/G400 support     (sets FB_MATROX_G100)
> > #   G400 second head support
> > 
> > where the second depends on the first _not_ being selected.
> > 
> > How about this instead?
> > 
> > # Gxxx (generic) (sets FB_MATROX_G100)
> > #   G400 second head (depends FB_MATROX_GXXX, FB_MATROX_I2C)
> >              (sets FB_MATROX_G450)
> > #   G450/550 support (depends on FB_MATROX_GXXX)
> 
> Please no. It was this way in 2.4.x, and I was receiving at least
> two complaints a week that their G450 does not work with their
> system.
> 
> G400's second head has nothing to do with G450/G550, so there is
> no reason why G400 second head should set FB_MATROX_G450...

Sorry, typo. Should have been:

# Gxxx (generic) (sets FB_MATROX_G100)
#   G400 second head (depends FB_MATROX_GXXX, FB_MATROX_I2C)
#            (sets FB_MATROX_MAVEN)
#   G450/550 support (depends on FB_MATROX_GXXX)
#            (sets FB_MATROX_G450)

> If anything, then let's remove G100/G200/G400 choice completely,
> making G450/G550 support unconditional.

That's fine with me, too. As far as I am concerned, you can throw the
whole Matrox G??? bunch together :-). It's just the current presentation
that is confusing.

Roger

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2004-06-07 18:00 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-06-07 17:43 Matrox Kconfig Petr Vandrovec
2004-06-07 17:59 ` Roger Luethi
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-06-05 11:40 Roger Luethi

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox