W dniu 08.04.2019 o 23:56, Lucian Cristian pisze: > On 08.04.2019 20:19, Tomasz Maciej Nowak wrote: >> Hi Petr, Alberto, >> >> W dniu 08.04.2019 o 14:34, Alberto Bursi pisze: >>> On 08/04/19 11:42, Petr Štetiar wrote: >>>> Tomasz Maciej Nowak <tome...@o2.pl> [2019-04-07 18:35:01]: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> thanks for trying to unbreak currently failing Geode builds. >>>> >>>>> Building images for geode has been failing because of missing >>>>> dependencies: >>>>> backlight.ko >>>>> drm_kms_helper.ko >>>>> fb.ko >>>>> ttm.ko >>>>> Being geode a speciffic hardware, where drm-radeon and drm-amdgpu modules >>>>> will probably never be used, disable both. >>>> Fixing the kernel module dependencies is PITA, I know, but this simply >>>> doesn't >>>> look like a proper fix to me, rather just like a workaround. >> Yes, adding those modules to dependencies would solve the issue, but for how >> long? If AMD people would decide to add another module to dependencies, we >> would need to fix it again and fix something not one would ever use on this >> target, only for the sake of it?
Sorry, I may have sounded harsh and triggered here, that was not my intention. I'm fine with either, but please do consider that with other solution that may not be the final one for the future. >> >>>> -- ynezz >>>> >>>> >>> It is indeed a workaround, but is it worth to spend time troubleshooting >>> something that is never going to be used? >>> >>> I don't see why these modules were built at all. It's pretty hard or even >>> impossible >>> to run any addon graphics card on a Geode system. >>> >>> At most they have PCI slots, many (the networking alix boards from >>> PCEngines) only have mini PCI slots. >>> >>> drm-amdgpu will 100% never be used as it runs modern PCIe cards. >>> >>> I don't find any good reason to mount an ancient AMD card over a >>> PCI slot (or mini pci slot + adapter) as they have their own integrated >>> graphics with a VGA port already. >>> >>> -Alberto >> Thanks, this is more or less what I had in mind deciding how to approach >> this, and form this POV calling it workaround is debatable. I'll leave patch >> in this form, if anyone wants to take different approach, please do. >> >> Regards >> > Because I crashed that, if your approach is not accepted I'll add the module > dependencies, I didn't put them in the generic config because I also thought > it will only be used on modern hardware Thanks, please do. > > Regards > > Lucian Regards -- TMN _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
