On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Aguirre Rodriguez, Sergio Alberto <saaguirre@xxxxxx> wrote: > From: Tony Lindgren [tony@xxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 11:28 AM >> * Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [090922 07:59]: >> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 3:31 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > This patch has been applied to the linux-omap >> > > by youw fwiendly patch wobot. >> > > >> > > Branch in linux-omap: omap-fixes >> > > >> > > Initial commit ID (Likely to change): 9aef1066fb5ca8506068eaab1c552ecca4c85475 >> > > >> > > PatchWorks >> > > http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/47089/ >> > > >> > >> >> Added back the original Cc's that were dropped from the linux-omap >> commit message. >> >> > Is it actually safe to do this? The framebuffer can be used directly >> > after it is registered. In this case it would mean it is used before >> > it is even fully initialized (set_fb_var(), set_fb_fix(), ... are >> > being called). >> >> Good point, dropping the patch. > > Hmm, ok. I guess i'll rework this patch considering that.. > > I ran some framebuffer tests with this patch applied, and they worked fine for me. > > The only thing is that i didn't saw Tux on bootup... > > Actually, nobody ever gave this kind of feedback, which was the initial idea. > Sorry, I didn't look into it earlier. BTW, I actually wonder if it's really necessary to initialize the mutex in register_framebuffer() or why it couldn't be done during allocation. Cheers, Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
