On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 10:11:31AM +0100, Russell King wrote: > On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 10:58:17AM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 09:40:52AM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > > Wrong. Please read the example with the diagrams I gave. Consider > > > what happens if you have two display devices connected to a single > > > output, one which fixes the allowable mode and one which _can_ > > > reformat the selected mode. > > > > What you describe here is a forced clone mode. This could be described > > in the devicetree so that a driver wouldn't start before all connected > > displays (links) are present, but this should be limited to the affected > > path, not to the whole componentized device. > > Okay, to throw a recent argument back at you: so what in this scenario > if you have a driver for the fixed-mode device but not the other device? > > It's exactly the same problem which you were describing to Sebastian > just a moment ago with drivers missing from the supernode approach - > you can't start if one of those "forced clone" drivers is missing. Indeed, then you will see nothing on your display, but I rather make this setup a special case than the rather usual case that we do not have compiled in all drivers for all devices referenced in the supernode. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
