[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4fac9803-50d2-0c83-8b49-a1b2058d7da0@moonlit-rail.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2022 15:20:07 -0500
From: "Kris Karas (Bug reporting)" <bugs-a21@...nlit-rail.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Linux Fbdev development list <linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] video: vga16fb: Fix logic that checks for the display
standard
Groetje, Geert,
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>
>> - par->isVGA = screen_info.orig_video_isVGA;
>> + par->isVGA = screen_info.orig_video_isVGA == VIDEO_TYPE_VGAC;
> All non-x86 architectures (except for 2 MIPS platforms) treat
> orig_video_isVGA as a boolean flag, and just assign 1 to it.
> Hence this change would break them.
I see a bit of a conflict with using orig_video_isVGA as a boolean. All
the modern architecture-agnostic driver code, such as sysfb,
sysfb_simplefb, and efifb, all use and expect orig_video_isVGA to be an
integer. On the other hand, the VGA driver for XEN first sets
orig_video_isVGA = 1 (boolean), and then VIDEO_TYPE_VLFB or
VIDEO_TYPE_EFI (integer). Overloading the definition for
orig_video_isVGA to be both boolean and integer - within the same file -
seems like a recipe for bugs to me.
That said, I think that wrapping the par->isVGA code, above, within a
check for CONFIG_X86 seems safe and expedient. But I would be much
happier if the non-x86 architectures would set it to a proper integer
value (even if fake) that coincidentally satisfies boolean "true", say
VIDEO_TYPE_VGAC; that way, there would be no confusion as to data type
in all the more recent architecture-agnostic framebuffer code.
Kris
Powered by blists - more mailing lists