[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1240903942.7620.68.camel@twins>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 09:32:22 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kms in defconfig
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 11:54 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 1:40 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-04-27 at 10:39 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> * Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi guys,
> >> >
> >> > I just noticed CONFIG_DRM_I915_KMS is enabled for x86-64.
> >> >
> >> > This should never be the case, as anyone who built defconfig
> >> > kernels before, will now get KMS enabled when really they need to
> >> > have done userspace upgrades.
> >>
> >> I've yet to see such a bugreport.
> >
> > Whenever I accidentally enable KMS I get a dead X (happens way more
> > often that I'd like to), I blame this on the ubuntu Xorg packages, but
> > can't be arsed to fix it myself -- hopefully the kinky koala will fix
> > stuff, but who knows.
>
> Well you can't really blame anyone else for it, since you have to put
> the code upstream
> in the kernel before you can release drivers that use it for distros to package.
>
> So it would be impossible for any distro to have shipped kms drivers in a useful
> fashion before KMS is actually in the kernel.
Can't the driver detect KMS and use it when present? In that case they
could just ship a KMS capable driver that works either way.
Anyway, I'm sure it'll all sort itself out.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists