On 07/05/2018 03:21 PM, Zhenyu Wang wrote:
On 2018.07.04 11:07:45 +0800, intel-gfx-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Hang Yuan <hang.yuan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
This helps initramfs builder and other tools to know the full dependencies
of i915 and have gvt module loaded with i915.
v2: add condition and change to pre-dependency (Chris)
v3: move declaration to gvt.c. (Chris)
Signed-off-by: Hang Yuan <hang.yuan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gvt.c | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gvt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gvt.c
index 4e65266..00f487e9 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gvt.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gvt.c
@@ -468,3 +468,10 @@ int intel_gvt_init_device(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
kfree(gvt);
return ret;
}
+
+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_I915_GVT_KVMGT)
+MODULE_SOFTDEP("pre: kvmgt");
+#elif IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_I915_GVT_XENGT)
+MODULE_SOFTDEP("pre: xengt");
+#endif
+
Why xengt? it's not in upstream at all, so should be splitted and
apply to its topic branch only.
Henry: I understand xengt_mpt is not in upstream but general part of gvt
like gvt.c is in upstream.
The change of the patch is in the general part. Do you think so?
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
