From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262422AbTJXR7i (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Oct 2003 13:59:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262441AbTJXR7i (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Oct 2003 13:59:38 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:28115 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262422AbTJXR7h (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Oct 2003 13:59:37 -0400 Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 10:59:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Petr Vandrovec cc: Jeff Garzik , Jon Smirl , Eric Anholt , , Kernel Mailing List , , dri-devel Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] DRM and pci_driver conversion In-Reply-To: <20031024165718.GA4972@vana.vc.cvut.cz> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 24 Oct 2003, Petr Vandrovec wrote: > > It would be nice if it works... For matrox hardware I have to map ROM > over framebuffer (it is solution recommended by datasheet), as there is > no way to get memory range allocated for ROM unless ROM was left enabled > all the time. That's fine - it sounds like Matrox hardware is just buggy, and then you will never be able to use the generic "enable ROM" routines. That shouldn't detract from other drivers doing it, though. On the other hand, we might well be able to work around the matrox behaviour if we really want to: writing all-ones to the register should work, and that is the way we figure out the size of the allocation anyway. So this is one of those things where having a generic routine and knowing a bit about some implementation oddities migth well work out. Maybe some other cards have the same odd behaviour. But since Matrox has a separate recommended solution in their datasheets, I suspect the right thing is just to ignore Matrox when talking about the generic thing. Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] DRM and pci_driver conversion Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 10:59:07 -0700 (PDT) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: References: <20031024165718.GA4972@vana.vc.cvut.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20031024165718.GA4972@vana.vc.cvut.cz> List-Id: Cc: Jeff Garzik , Jon Smirl , Eric Anholt , kronos@kronoz.cjb.net, Kernel Mailing List , linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, dri-devel On Fri, 24 Oct 2003, Petr Vandrovec wrote: > > It would be nice if it works... For matrox hardware I have to map ROM > over framebuffer (it is solution recommended by datasheet), as there is > no way to get memory range allocated for ROM unless ROM was left enabled > all the time. That's fine - it sounds like Matrox hardware is just buggy, and then you will never be able to use the generic "enable ROM" routines. That shouldn't detract from other drivers doing it, though. On the other hand, we might well be able to work around the matrox behaviour if we really want to: writing all-ones to the register should work, and that is the way we figure out the size of the allocation anyway. So this is one of those things where having a generic routine and knowing a bit about some implementation oddities migth well work out. Maybe some other cards have the same odd behaviour. But since Matrox has a separate recommended solution in their datasheets, I suspect the right thing is just to ignore Matrox when talking about the generic thing. Linus