On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 02:54:29PM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 02:54:51PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 01:43:34PM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 09:32:57PM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > > > From: Teddy Wang <teddy.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > If vesafb is enabled in the config then /dev/fb0 is created by vesa > > > > and this sm750 driver gets fb1, fb2. But we need to be fb0 and fb1 to > > > > effectively work with xorg. > > > > So if it has been alloted fb1, then try to remove the other fb0. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Teddy Wang <teddy.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > > > Hi Greg, > > > You applied the second patch but not this one. Did I miss any review > > > comments from you about this one? > > > > All of the other complaints about this patch were not sufficient for me > > to justify ignoring it? Why would I not listen to them? > > This patch is doing what all the drm drivers are doing. So you want > us to do something completely new rather than following the established > practice of a drm driver? I despise cargo-cult programming. You could not answer the "why", so why would I accept such a patch? greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
