From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753338Ab3GIVDC (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Jul 2013 17:03:02 -0400 Received: from avon.wwwdotorg.org ([70.85.31.133]:38846 "EHLO avon.wwwdotorg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752493Ab3GIVDB (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Jul 2013 17:03:01 -0400 Message-ID: <51DC7A80.9030201@wwwdotorg.org> Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:02:56 -0600 From: Stephen Warren User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Herrmann CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Airlie , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Geert Uytterhoeven , Peter Jones , Tomi Valkeinen , Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard , x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] Platform Framebuffers and SimpleDRM References: <1372940714-12470-1-git-send-email-dh.herrmann@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1372940714-12470-1-git-send-email-dh.herrmann@gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/04/2013 06:25 AM, David Herrmann wrote: > Hi > > This series changes the way we handle firmware framebuffers on x86 systems. On > other architectures the recently introduced "simple-framebuffer" > platform-devices provide a sane and proper way to handle firmware framebuffers. > So why not use it on x86, too? Tested-by: Stephen Warren (This time I didn't see any issue with the FB content being blank; I must have forgotten a console= command-line parameter or something the last time around)