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.vet...@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmerm...@suse.de>
Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas <javi...@redhat.com>
Cc: Helge Deller <del...@gmx.de>
Cc: linux-fb...@vger.kernel.org
---
  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

Reply via email to