On 6/4/21 2:20 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 11:41:29AM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> On 6/3/21 10:27 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 04:59:10PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
[snip]
>
> For myself I wrote a script to try being sm
On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 11:41:29AM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> On 6/3/21 10:27 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 04:59:10PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
...
> > Btw, for the future, please CC everyone on the whole patchset - I had to
> > go look at your
Hello Borislav,
On 6/3/21 10:27 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 04:59:10PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> The series touches different subystems and will need coordination between
>> maintainers. Ard Biesheuvel said that can be merged through the EFI tree.
>
> I'm
On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 04:59:10PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> The series touches different subystems and will need coordination between
> maintainers. Ard Biesheuvel said that can be merged through the EFI tree.
I'm always happy when code from arch/x86/ moves away so
Acked-by: Boris
The simplefb and simpledrm drivers match against a "simple-framebuffer"
device, but for aarch64 this is only registered when using Device Trees
and there's a node with a "simple-framebuffer" compatible string.
There is no code to register a "simple-framebuffer" platform device when
using EFI inste
