Hi On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote: > Hm, my plan was actually to just provide a drm_dev_setunique to drivers so > that they can set whatever their userspace wants, and then have no > set_busid implementation here at all for !pci. Some userspace at least > uses the unique thing to match for the driver, so we need to do the usual > bending over backwards to keep it consistent.
What's the different between a hard-coded per-driver string and dev_name()? I mean, doesn't the device name include the driver string? Or do drivers require more fine-grained naming? Like chipset-specific suffixes/prefixes in the busid? Anyway, I'm fine with both and really like the approach of killing of drm_bus. So all acked-by me. Thanks David
