On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:59:05PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On 12/16/2014 09:42 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Peter Hurley <pe...@hurleysoftware.com> > > wrote: > >> On 12/16/2014 11:22 AM, Imre Deak wrote: > >>> On Tue, 2014-12-16 at 10:00 -0500, Peter Hurley wrote: > >>>> Fine. Just another expedient fix piled on top of other expedient fixes > >>>> that go back past 3.9 with no end in sight. > >>> > >>> I'm also happy to look into narrowing down the scope of console_lock in > >>> fbdev/fbcon as was suggested. But doing that as a follow-up to this > >>> change still makes sense to me since it will take more time and have the > >>> risk of regressions that are not related to what this change fixes. > >> > >> I apologize for my tone. I'm not blaming you for the current situation, > >> nor is it your responsibility to go fix vt/fbcon/fbdev driver stack > >> inversion. I'm just trying to bring some awareness of the larger scope, > >> so that collectively we take action and resolve the underlying problems. > > > > Yeah I guess I should tune down my NACK to a Grumpy-if-merged-by too. > > We have a lot of nonoptimal solutions at hand here :( > > So where does that leave us with this fix? Should we wait for someone > to come along and do all the rework? Imre said he'd be willing to do > it, but still feels this fix makes sense. > > Or we could just abandon the fb layer altogether (my preference). In > that case fixing this is fine, since we'll be able to ignore it for > configs that switch over to using !fbdev and kmscon.
I think I already merged the patches a while ago :) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
