Hi Arnd.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 10:03:23PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:50 PM Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>
> >
> > So what this try to say is that we cannot have FB a module while DRM is
> > built-in (marked N in the above).
>
> Correct
>
> >
> > Could you explain in the c
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:50 PM Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>
> So what this try to say is that we cannot have FB a module while DRM is
> built-in (marked N in the above).
Correct
>
> Could you explain in the changelog why this combination is not good.
> (Or tell me if my analysis was flawed).
I agree
Hi Arnd.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 05:55:51PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> CONFIG_DRM_KMS_FB_HELPER selects CONFIG_FB, which is something it
> really should not, to avoid circular dependencies and accidentally
> including potentially dangerous user interfaces in the kernel,
> so change this into a
CONFIG_DRM_KMS_FB_HELPER selects CONFIG_FB, which is something it
really should not, to avoid circular dependencies and accidentally
including potentially dangerous user interfaces in the kernel,
so change this into a 'depends on' check.
Two device drivers currently select CONFIG_DRM_KMS_FB_HELPER
