On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 at 18:11, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Am 13.07.21 um 18:59 schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
> > On 6/25/21 3:09 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> >> The simplefb and simpledrm drivers match against a "simple-framebuffer"
> >> device, but for aarch64 this is only registered when using Device Trees
> >> and there's a node with a "simple-framebuffer" compatible string.
> >>
> >> There is no code to register a "simple-framebuffer" platform device when
> >> using EFI instead. In fact, the only platform device that's registered in
> >> this case is an "efi-framebuffer", which means that the efifb driver is
> >> the only driver supported to have an early console with EFI on aarch64.
> >>
> >> The x86 architecture platform has a Generic System Framebuffers (sysfb)
> >> support, that register a system frambuffer platform device. It either
> >> registers a "simple-framebuffer" for the simple{fb,drm} drivers or legacy
> >> VGA/EFI FB devices for the vgafb/efifb drivers.
> >>
> >> The sysfb is generic enough to be reused by other architectures and can be
> >> moved out of the arch/x86 directory to drivers/firmware, allowing the EFI
> >> logic used by non-x86 architectures to be folded into sysfb as well.
> >>
> >
> > Any more comments on this series? It would be nice for this to land so the
> > simpledrm driver could be used on aarch64 EFI systems as well.
> >
> > The patches have already been acked by x86 and DRM folks.
>
> Time to get this merged, I'd say. People are asking for these patches
> already.
Can we just merge via drm-misc and make sure the acks are present and
I'll deal with the fallout if any.
Dave.
