linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] allow simple{fb, drm} drivers to be used on non-x86 EFI platforms

lists.openwall.net		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 linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAPM=9tyfNPa2f5PDBLm4w_H_riEQ5P3rEhX73YGE1y_ygRox+w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Jul 2021 12:59:06 +1000
From:   Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>
To:     Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>
Cc:     Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@...il.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] allow simple{fb, drm} drivers to be used on
 non-x86 EFI platforms

On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 at 18:11, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Am 13.07.21 um 18:59 schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
> > On 6/25/21 3:09 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> >> The simplefb and simpledrm drivers match against a "simple-framebuffer"
> >> device, but for aarch64 this is only registered when using Device Trees
> >> and there's a node with a "simple-framebuffer" compatible string.
> >>
> >> There is no code to register a "simple-framebuffer" platform device when
> >> using EFI instead. In fact, the only platform device that's registered in
> >> this case is an "efi-framebuffer", which means that the efifb driver is
> >> the only driver supported to have an early console with EFI on aarch64.
> >>
> >> The x86 architecture platform has a Generic System Framebuffers (sysfb)
> >> support, that register a system frambuffer platform device. It either
> >> registers a "simple-framebuffer" for the simple{fb,drm} drivers or legacy
> >> VGA/EFI FB devices for the vgafb/efifb drivers.
> >>
> >> The sysfb is generic enough to be reused by other architectures and can be
> >> moved out of the arch/x86 directory to drivers/firmware, allowing the EFI
> >> logic used by non-x86 architectures to be folded into sysfb as well.
> >>
> >
> > Any more comments on this series? It would be nice for this to land so the
> > simpledrm driver could be used on aarch64 EFI systems as well.
> >
> > The patches have already been acked by x86 and DRM folks.
>
> Time to get this merged, I'd say. People are asking for these patches
> already.

Can we just merge via drm-misc and make sure the acks are present and
I'll deal with the fallout if any.

Dave.