[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3430838d-1c63-da49-b774-c5a883e7085f@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2022 15:18:14 +0100
From: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@...log.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
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 0/4] fbtft: Unorphan the driver for maintenance
On 1/26/22 15:11, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 02:47:33PM +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> On 1/26/22 14:27, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 12:18:30PM +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>>>> On 1/26/22 11:59, Helge Deller wrote:
>>>>> On 1/26/22 11:02, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>>>>> P.S. For the record, I will personally NAK any attempts to remove that
>>>>>> driver from the kernel. And this is another point why it's better not
>>>>>> to be under the staging.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree. Same as for me to NAK the disabling of fbcon's acceleration
>>>>> features or even attempting to remove fbdev altogether (unless all
>>>>> relevant drivers are ported to DRM).
>>>>
>>>> But that will never happen if we keep moving the goal post.
>>>>
>>>> At some point new fbdev drivers should not be added anymore, otherwise
>>>> the number of existing drivers that need conversion will keep growing.
>>>
>>> This thread is not about adding a new driver.
>>
>> It was about adding a new drivers to drivers/video/ (taken from staging).
>
> Does it mean gates are open to take any new fbdev drivers to the staging?
> If not, I do not see a point here.
>
Good question. I don't know really.
But staging has always been more flexible in what's accepted there and
that's why some distros avoid to enable CONFIG_STAGING=y in the kernel.
Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Linux Engineering
Red Hat
Powered by blists - more mailing lists