Hi Daniel, On Mon, 2018-04-09 at 11:17 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:55:36AM +0000, Alexey Brodkin wrote: > > Hi Daniel, > > > > On Mon, 2018-04-09 at 10:31 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 06:39:41PM +0000, Alexey Brodkin wrote: > > > > Hi Daniel, all, > > > > [snip] > > > > > > Ok it was quite some time ago so I forgot about that completely. > > > > I really made one trivial change in xf86-video-armada: > > > > ------------------------>8-------------------------- > > > > --- a/src/armada_module.c > > > > +++ b/src/armada_module.c > > > > @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ > > > > #define ARMADA_NAME "armada" > > > > #define ARMADA_DRIVER_NAME "armada" > > > > > > > > -#define DRM_MODULE_NAMES "armada-drm", "imx-drm" > > > > +#define DRM_MODULE_NAMES "armada-drm", "imx-drm", "udl" > > > > #define DRM_DEFAULT_BUS_ID NULL > > > > ------------------------>8-------------------------- > > > > > > > > Otherwise Xserver fails on start which is expected given "imx-drm" is intentionally removed. > > > > Here I meant I explicitly disabled DRM_IMX in the kernel configuraion > > so that it is not used in run-time. > > > > > You need to keep imx-drm around. And then light up the udl display using > > > prime. Afaiui it should all just work (but with maybe a few disconnected > > > outputs from imx-drm around that you don't need, but that's not a > > > problem). > > > > And given my comment above I don't really see any difference between > > DRM_IMX and DRM_UDL (except their HW implmentation which I guess should > > not bother upper layers) so why do wee need to treat them differently? > > > > Most probably I'm missing something but my thought was if we have > > 2 equally well supported KMS devices we may easily swap them and still > > have resulting setup functional. > > armada is not a generic drm driver, but can only be used for armada-drm > and imx-drm. You can't just use it with any drm device, for that you need > a generic driver like -modesetting. But "armada" is the name of xf86 "driver" only which then uses true DRM_ETNAVIV kernel driver. That's why I'm a bit confused. And from what I see DRM_ETNAVIV happily works with either DRM_xxx frame-buffer device be it DRM_IMX or DRM_UDL. -Alexey _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
