linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] fbtft: Unorphan the driver

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]

Date:   Wed, 26 Jan 2022 15:07:40 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Helge Deller <deller@....de>
Cc:     Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@...log.com>,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>,
        Carlis <zhangxuezhi1@...ong.com>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] fbtft: Unorphan the driver

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 12:17:08PM +0100, Helge Deller wrote:
> On 1/26/22 11:31, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 9:31 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:

...

> > On the other hand ... why does it have to be resurrecting fbdev?
> > There's an entire community of people who really know graphics and
> > display and spent considerable amount of effort on creating useful and
> > documented helpers for pretty much anything you might ever want to do.
> > And somehow we have to go back to typing out things the hard way, with
> > full verbosity, for an uapi that distros are abandoning (e.g. even for
> > sdl the direction is to run it on top of drm with a compat layer,
> > afaiui fedora is completely ditching any userspace that still even
> > uses /dev/fb/0). And yes I know there's still some gaps in drm,
> > largely for display features which were really en vogue about 20 years
> > ago. And we're happy to add that support, if someone who still has
> > such hardware can put in the little bit of work needed ...
> >
> > I don't get this.
> 
> You are describing a transitioning over to DRM - which is Ok.
> But on that way there is no need to ignore, deny or even kill usage scenarios
> which are different compared to your usage scenarios (e.g. embedded devices,
> old platforms, slow devices, slow busses, no 3D hardware features,
> low-color devices, ...).

Exactly, I am on the same side here.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko