Hi

Am 21.05.21 um 17:33 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 03:19:10PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> Framebuffer devices that are registered by DRM drivers for fbdev emulation
>> have a "drmfb" suffix in their name. But makes them to be quite confusing
>> if a driver already has "drm" in its name:
>>
>> $ cat /proc/fb
>> 0 rockchipdrmdrmfb
>>
>> $ cat /proc/fb
>> 0 simpledrmdrmfb
>>
>> Instead, let's just add a "-fb" suffix to denote that are DRM drivers FB:
>>
>> $ cat /proc/fb
>> 0 rockchipdrm-fb
>>
>> $ cat /proc/fb
>> 0 simpledrm-fb
>>
>> Suggested-by: Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@gmail.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
> 
> So what with all the drivers which do _not_ have drm in their name? Also
> I'm never sure how much these are uapi or not ...

Why do we need a suffix anyway?

> -Daniel
> 
>> ---
>>
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c
>> index f6baa204612..bbaff92c509 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c
>> @@ -1737,7 +1737,7 @@ void drm_fb_helper_fill_info(struct fb_info *info,
>>   			       sizes->fb_width, sizes->fb_height);
>>   
>>   	info->par = fb_helper;
>> -	snprintf(info->fix.id, sizeof(info->fix.id), "%sdrmfb",
>> +	snprintf(info->fix.id, sizeof(info->fix.id), "%s-fb",
>>   		 fb_helper->dev->driver->name);
>>   
>>   }
>> -- 
>> 2.31.1
>>
> 

-- 
Thomas Zimmermann
Graphics Driver Developer
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
(HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg)
Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer