From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] drm/i915: Wrap the preallocated BIOS
 framebuffer and preserve for KMS fbcon v7
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2013 12:33:42 +0100
Message-ID: <20131214113342.GM9804@phenom.ffwll.local>
References: <1386880917-2951-1-git-send-email-jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
	<1386880917-2951-3-git-send-email-jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
	<20131212225437.GT9804@phenom.ffwll.local>
	<20131213110905.06046c4e@jbarnes-desktop>
	<CAKMK7uEKNAOHcWdA13=A4H-jbogBRjrhPkdARfeDRMsfnezGJw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20131213164350.49c244c8@jbarnes-desktop>
	<20131214104406.GH9804@phenom.ffwll.local>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mail-ea0-f175.google.com (mail-ea0-f175.google.com
	[209.85.215.175])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6F7DFADA5
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Sat, 14 Dec 2013 03:32:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ea0-f175.google.com with SMTP id z10so1312150ead.6
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Sat, 14 Dec 2013 03:32:50 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20131214104406.GH9804@phenom.ffwll.local>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Cc: intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 11:44:06AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 04:43:50PM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > This is just fixing up existing code to use the new field name, so no
> > functional change.  I see what you mean about splitting out the field
> > change, but now that would be a pain :/
> 
> Yeah, the switch from struct to pointer for ifbdev->fb would be neat as a
> separate patch, but also real pain to split out now.

I'm inclined to say that we actually need the split-out conversion to a
pointer. I might have lost my traces somewhere in this maze, but I think
with the current patches we can have a NULL deref on ifbdev->fb in
intelfb_create. Not sure, but a split-out patch would definitely help ;-)
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch