Hi Am 11.01.23 um 16:41 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
Otherwise it's bit silly, and we might throw out the driver for the screen the user is actually looking at. I haven't found a bug report for this case yet, but we did get bug reports for the analog case where we're throwing out the efifb driver. References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216303 Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx> Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Helge Deller <deller@xxxxxx> Cc: linux-fbdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- drivers/video/aperture.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/video/aperture.c b/drivers/video/aperture.c index 3d8c925c7365..6f351a58f6c6 100644 --- a/drivers/video/aperture.c +++ b/drivers/video/aperture.c @@ -341,6 +341,9 @@ int aperture_remove_conflicting_pci_devices(struct pci_dev *pdev, const char *na return ret; }+ if (!primary)+ return 0; +
The original code from fbdev didn't do this, so this code didn't either.It appears more to be a special case than an early-out branch. So can we write it as
if (primary) {
// kick_vgacon
}
?
Best regards
Thomas
/* * WARNING: Apparently we must kick fbdev drivers before vgacon, * otherwise the vga fbdev driver falls over.
-- Thomas Zimmermann Graphics Driver Developer SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg) Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
