On 08/07/2012 04:33 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 06:04:30PM +0530, Leela Krishna Amudala wrote: >> arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/regs-fb-v4.h | 159 -------------------- >> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_fimd.c | 2 +- >> drivers/video/s3c-fb.c | 2 +- >> .../plat/regs-fb.h => include/video/samsung_fimd.h | 152 +++++++++++++++++-- > > Isn't include/video for framebuffer drivers? Isn't this more a DRM thing? > Wouldn't include/drm therefore be more appropriate? Those headers are now used by both: framebuffer and Exynos DRM driver. And probably the framebuffer driver has more users, as it also covers older FIMD devices than those found on exynos4/5 SoCs. So include/video seems equally right (or wrong) as include/drm. There have been some efforts, or at least requirements raised, to create some common low level API for framebuffer and DRM drivers, but nothing has clarified yet AFAICS. _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
