Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: tell the user if both KMS and UMS are disabled

2014-05-27 Thread Jani Nikula
On Tue, 27 May 2014, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 07:24:12PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: >> If both KMS is disabled (by i915.modeset=0 or nomodeset parameters) and >> UMS is disabled (by CONFIG_DRM_I915_UMS=n, the default), the user might >> not be aware his setup is not supported.

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: tell the user if both KMS and UMS are disabled

2014-05-27 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 07:24:12PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > If both KMS is disabled (by i915.modeset=0 or nomodeset parameters) and > UMS is disabled (by CONFIG_DRM_I915_UMS=n, the default), the user might > not be aware his setup is not supported. Inform the users (and, by > extension, the poor

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: tell the user if both KMS and UMS are disabled

2014-05-27 Thread Jani Nikula
If both KMS is disabled (by i915.modeset=0 or nomodeset parameters) and UMS is disabled (by CONFIG_DRM_I915_UMS=n, the default), the user might not be aware his setup is not supported. Inform the users (and, by extension, the poor i915 developers having to read their dmesgs in bug reports) why thei