From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751930AbdHBQhL (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Aug 2017 12:37:11 -0400 Received: from vern.gendns.com ([206.190.152.46]:47613 "EHLO vern.gendns.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751162AbdHBQhJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Aug 2017 12:37:09 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/fb-helper: pass physical dimensions to fbdev To: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Vetter References: <1501601201-32590-1-git-send-email-david@lechnology.com> <20170802094638.egbninloeganxdrp@phenom.ffwll.local> From: David Lechner Message-ID: <8ef4c8cb-59d9-a201-55fc-b7878c6790c7@lechnology.com> Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 11:37:08 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170802094638.egbninloeganxdrp@phenom.ffwll.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - vern.gendns.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - lechnology.com X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: vern.gendns.com: authenticated_id: davidmain+lechnology.com/only user confirmed/virtual account not confirmed X-Authenticated-Sender: vern.gendns.com: davidmain@lechnology.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 08/02/2017 04:46 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 10:26:41AM -0500, David Lechner wrote: >> The fbdev subsystem has a place for physical dimensions (width and height >> in mm) that is readable by userspace. Since DRM also knows these >> dimensions, pass this information to the fbdev device. >> >> Signed-off-by: David Lechner > > Still in the wrong function. Also please add some notation about what you > changed when resubmitting a patch (it took me a while to remember that I > replied to you already). That makes patch reviewing more efficient. > Sorry for being so dense. :-/ I did read your first reply at least 10 times. All of the terminology is foreign to me, but after sleeping on it a few days, I think it is slowly soaking into my brain.