Hi,
On 2023/9/6 14:45, Christian König wrote:
Firmware framebuffer device already get killed by the
drm_aperture_remove_conflicting_pci_framebuffers()
function (or its siblings). So, this series is definitely not to
interact with the firmware framebuffer
(or more intelligent framebuffer drivers). It is for user space
program, such as X server and Wayland
compositor. Its for Linux user or drm drivers testers, which allow
them to direct graphic display server
using right hardware of interested as primary video card.
Also, I believe that X server and Wayland compositor are the best
test examples.
If a specific DRM driver can't work with X server as a primary,
then there probably have something wrong.
But what's the use case for overriding this setting?
On a specific machine with multiple GPUs mounted,
only the primary graphics get POST-ed (initialized) by the firmware.
Therefore, the DRM drivers for the rest video cards, have to choose to
work without the prerequisite setups done by firmware, This is called
as POST.
Well, you don't seem to understand the background here. This is
perfectly normal behavior.
Secondary cards are posted after loading the appropriate DRM driver.
At least for amdgpu this is done by calling the appropriate functions
in the BIOS.
Well, thanks for you tell me this. You know more than me and definitely have a better understanding.
Are you telling me that the POST function for AMDGPU reside in the BIOS?
The kernel call into the BIOS?
Does the BIOS here refer to the UEFI runtime or ATOM BIOS or something else?
But the POST function for the drm ast, reside in the kernel space (in other word, in ast.ko).
Is this statement correct?
I means that for ASpeed BMC chip, if the firmware not POST the display controller.
Then we have to POST it at the kernel space before doing various modeset option.
We can only POST this chip by directly operate the various registers.
Am I correct for the judgement about ast drm driver?
Thanks for your reviews.
