lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 6 Mar 2014 13:16:34 +0100
From:	David Herrmann <>
To:	Tomi Valkeinen <>
Cc:	"" <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>,
	"" <>,
	Dave Airlie <>,
	Daniel Vetter <>,
	linux-kernel <>,
	Tom Gundersen <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] SimpleDRM & Sysfb

Hi Tomi

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Tomi Valkeinen <> wrote:
> On 03/03/14 13:09, David Herrmann wrote:
>>> What do you think, would it be possible to keep the sysfb stuff in
>>> arch/x86, and still be able to do the rest of the stuff here? And then
>>> move the sysfs from arch/x86 to drivers/video later?
>> I don't think there's any need for that. Linus does conflict
>> resolution all day long, so a short hint in Dave's pull-request (plus
>> an example merge) should be enough. Same is true for -next, I think.
> True, but, well, the conflict with this one is not a few lines. "git
> diff |wc -l" gives 2494 lines for the conflict. It's not really complex
> to resolve that one, though, as it's really about copying all the stuff
> into its new place.
> So I'm not sure if that makes Linus think "this is simple one, 30 secs
> and done" or "who the f*** sends me this crap" ;). Especially for two
> reasons:
> - The fb-reogranization is not very critical, and often clean-ups are
> not worth it (although I think this one is good one, of course).
> - Conflicting fbdev changes coming from another tree
>> And this is really just a mechanical thing, nothing hard to do. But of
>> course, it's your decision. However, keeping the code in x86 is the
>> wrong thing to do. As discussed with Ingo, the patch that extends
> Yes, I didn't mean keeping the code in x86 for good, but just for one
> kernel version to make merging easier.
>> x86/sysfb is only provided for easier backporting. The followup patch
>> immediately removes it again and adds proper video/sysfb. I'd dislike
>> splitting these just to avoid merge conflicts. I can also maintain a
>> merge-fixup branch in my tree, if anyone wants that.
> You can have a try at merging. If you think it's trivial, maybe it is
> and we can just let Linus handle it:
> git://
> work/fb-reorder

Ok, I'm fine with delaying this one more merge-window. However, to
make things easier, could you pick up the two fbdev cleanups? These
  fbdev: efifb: add dev->remove() callback
  fbdev: vesafb: add dev->remove() callback

They only add ->remove() callbacks which are never triggered currently
except with my sysfb series. But I'd like to drop both to make the
series smaller.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists