From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
To: David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@gmail.com>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>,
linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/6] x86: provide platform-devices for boot-framebuffers
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 14:49:27 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51CB53D7.7030602@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1372112849-670-3-git-send-email-dh.herrmann@gmail.com>
On 06/24/2013 04:27 PM, David Herrmann wrote:
> The current situation regarding boot-framebuffers (VGA, VESA/VBE, EFI) on
> x86 causes troubles when loading multiple fbdev drivers. The global
> "struct screen_info" does not provide any state-tracking about which
> drivers use the FBs. request_mem_region() theoretically works, but
> unfortunately vesafb/efifb ignore it due to quirks for broken boards.
>
> Avoid this by creating a "platform-framebuffer" device with a pointer
> to the "struct screen_info" as platform-data. Drivers can now create
> platform-drivers and the driver-core will refuse multiple drivers being
> active simultaneously.
>
> We keep the screen_info available for backwards-compatibility. Drivers
> can be converted in follow-up patches.
>
> Apart from "platform-framebuffer" devices, this also introduces a
> compatibility option for "simple-framebuffer" drivers which recently got
> introduced for OF based systems. If CONFIG_X86_SYSFB is selected, we
> try to match the screen_info against a simple-framebuffer supported
> format. If we succeed, we create a "simple-framebuffer" device instead
> of a platform-framebuffer.
> This allows to reuse the simplefb.c driver across architectures and also
> to introduce a SimpleDRM driver. There is no need to have vesafb.c,
> efifb.c, simplefb.c and more just to have architecture specific quirks
> in their setup-routines.
>
> Instead, we now move the architecture specific quirks into x86-setup and
> provide a generic simple-framebuffer. For backwards-compatibility (if
> strange formats are used), we still allow vesafb/efifb to be loaded
> simultaneously and pick up all remaining devices.
> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> +config X86_SYSFB
> + bool "Mark VGA/VBE/EFI FB as generic system framebuffer"
> + help
> + Firmwares often provide initial graphics framebuffers so the BIOS,
> + bootloader or kernel can show basic video-output during boot for
> + user-guidance and debugging. Historically, x86 used the VESA BIOS
> + Extensions and EFI-framebuffers for this, which are mostly limited
> + to x86. However, a generic system-framebuffer initialization emerged
> + recently on some non-x86 architectures.
After this patch has been in the kernel a while, that very last won't
really be true; simplefb won't have been introduced recently. Perhaps
just delete that one sentence?
> + This option, if enabled, marks VGA/VBE/EFI framebuffers as generic
> + framebuffers so the new generic system-framebuffer drivers can be
> + used on x86.
> +
> + This breaks any x86-only driver like efifb, vesafb, uvesafb, which
> + will not work if this is selected.
Doesn't that imply that some form of conflicts or depends ! statement
should be added here?
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile b/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile
> +obj-y += sysfb.o
I suspect that should be obj-$(CONFIG_X86_SYSFB) += sysfb.o.
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/sysfb.c b/arch/x86/kernel/sysfb.c
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_SYSFB
Rather than ifdef'ing the body of this file, why not create a dummy
static inline version of add_sysfb() and put that into a header file
that users include. There should be a header file to prototype the
function anyway. That way, you avoid all of the ifdefs and static inline
functions in this file.
> +static bool parse_mode(const struct screen_info *si,
> + struct simplefb_platform_data *mode)
> + strlcpy(mode->format, f->name, sizeof(mode->format));
Per my comments about the type of mode->format, I think that could just be:
mode->format = f->name;
... since formats[] (i.e. f) isn't initdata.
> +#else /* CONFIG_X86_SYSFB */
> +
> +static bool parse_mode(const struct screen_info *si,
> + struct simplefb_platform_data *mode)
> +{
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> +static int create_simplefb(const struct screen_info *si,
> + const struct simplefb_platform_data *mode)
> +{
> + return -EINVAL;
> +}
> +
> +#endif /* CONFIG_X86_SYSFB */
Following on from my ifdef comment above, I believe those versions of
those functions will always cause add_sysfb() to return -ENODEV, so you
may as well provide a static inline for add_sysfb() instead.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-26 20:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-24 22:27 [RFC 0/6] SimpleDRM Driver (was: dvbe driver) David Herrmann
2013-06-24 22:27 ` [RFC 1/6] fbdev: simplefb: add init through platform_data David Herrmann
2013-06-26 20:39 ` Stephen Warren
2013-06-28 10:03 ` David Herrmann
2013-06-24 22:27 ` [RFC 2/6] x86: provide platform-devices for boot-framebuffers David Herrmann
2013-06-26 20:49 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
2013-06-28 10:11 ` David Herrmann
2013-07-01 15:48 ` Stephen Warren
2013-06-24 22:27 ` [RFC 3/6] drm: add SimpleDRM driver David Herrmann
2013-06-25 1:05 ` Andy Lutomirski
2013-06-28 9:59 ` David Herrmann
2013-06-26 20:58 ` Stephen Warren
2013-06-28 10:01 ` David Herrmann
2013-06-24 22:27 ` [RFC 4/6] drm: simpledrm: add fbdev fallback support David Herrmann
2013-06-26 20:59 ` Stephen Warren
2013-06-28 10:14 ` David Herrmann
2013-06-24 22:27 ` [RFC 5/6] drm: add helpers to kick out firmware drivers David Herrmann
2013-06-24 22:27 ` [RFC 6/6] drm: nouveau: kick out firmware drivers during probe David Herrmann
2013-06-26 21:30 ` [RFC 0/6] SimpleDRM Driver (was: dvbe driver) Stephen Warren
2013-06-28 10:43 ` David Herrmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=51CB53D7.7030602@wwwdotorg.org \
--to=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=dh.herrmann@gmail.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=swarren@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).