From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754259AbZFVTo1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:44:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751506AbZFVToU (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:44:20 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:48867 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751497AbZFVToU (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:44:20 -0400 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:43:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds X-X-Sender: torvalds@localhost.localdomain To: Andrew Lutomirski cc: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Thomas_Hellstr=F6m?= , Dave Airlie , Alex Deucher , dri-devel@lists.sf.net, Jerome Glisse , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [git pull] drm: previous pull req + 1. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <4A3DABE1.50309@mit.edu> <4A3F3E3A.2030202@shipmail.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.01 (LFD 1184 2008-12-16) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 22 Jun 2009, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > > What if we only guaranteed that the framebuffer is mapped when it's > showing on the screen? I think that works ok. We only care about printk being immediate in that case, and if it gets buffered I don't think we care. > printk doesn't need to write to the framebuffer immediately when X > isn't running (since the framebuffer isn't shown) and presumably the > framebuffer needs to be pinned somewhere when it's being displayed > anyway. This would involve fbcon knowing how to buffer text to be > shown later so that printk still works in interrupt context. But doesn't fbcon do that _anyway_ for VC switching? (I've tried to stay out of fbcon, and have traditionally personally always preferred just regular VGA text mode, so I really have no clue about the internals). Linus