From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] acpi_video: Intel video is not always i915 Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 12:31:52 +0100 Message-ID: <20120425113152.GA8667@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20120424154402.1575.90373.stgit@bluebook> <20120424154434.1575.91463.stgit@bluebook> <20120424210218.GA25961@srcf.ucam.org> <20120424233117.6de0da6f@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> <20120424223022.GA27765@srcf.ucam.org> <20120425112711.613a3cf9@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:46373 "EHLO cavan.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758825Ab2DYLbz (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Apr 2012 07:31:55 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120425112711.613a3cf9@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: airlied@linux.ie, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 11:27:11AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 23:30:22 +0100 > Matthew Garrett wrote: > > Right now you seem to set opregion unconditionally on PVR, which seems > > to be equivalent to the 0xfc check that was there before - I can > > understand excluding i740, but the PVR check could be left with the gen > > hardware one? > > Not really - they are two drivers. If you build with i915 and not GMA500 > you need the opregion for one and the acpi fallback for the other, and > vice versa. So we have to check both CONFIG_xxx macro sets. > > Right now GMA500 needs the ACPI video stuff never to be enabled on some > machines. Until we've got full opregion support in the driver that won't > change. opregion always seems to be set to 1 if is_gma_pvr() is true, which means we'll now never bind the acpi video driver on PVR hardware. If that's what you want, why distinguish between PVR and GEN? -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org