On Tuesday 22 January 2013, Rob Clark wrote:
> I think it should be safe.. or at least it built fine for multi-plat in
> the recent past and shouldn't really do anything if there is no omapdss
> platform device.
>
> Do you want me to make a patch or are you already doing this?
Please make one.
On 01/22/2013 11:47 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 22 January 2013, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
Ie. I'd prefer to re-enable omapdss on multi-plat rather than
disabling omapdrm. With changes in drm core, it is a bit of a pain
to compile test all the arm drivers by doing N different builds, so
On Tuesday 22 January 2013, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > Ie. I'd prefer to re-enable omapdss on multi-plat rather than
> > disabling omapdrm. With changes in drm core, it is a bit of a pain
> > to compile test all the arm drivers by doing N different builds, so
> > we've been trying to get to the
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:57:44AM -0600, Rob Clark wrote:
> On 01/22/2013 10:53 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:39:31PM -0600, Rob Clark wrote:
> >>On 01/21/2013 11:41 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >>>On Monday 21 January 2013, Rob Clark wrote:
> Are you sure OMAP2_DSS
On 01/22/2013 10:53 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:39:31PM -0600, Rob Clark wrote:
On 01/21/2013 11:41 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 21 January 2013, Rob Clark wrote:
Are you sure OMAP2_DSS requires ARCH_OMAP2PLUS? I don't see this, and
it at least used to not d
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:39:31PM -0600, Rob Clark wrote:
> On 01/21/2013 11:41 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >On Monday 21 January 2013, Rob Clark wrote:
> >>Are you sure OMAP2_DSS requires ARCH_OMAP2PLUS? I don't see this, and
> >>it at least used to not depend on ARCH_OMAP2PLUS. If it does now,
On Monday 21 January 2013, Rob Clark wrote:
> ahh, ok, I see.. the if ARCH_OMAP2PLUS bit looks like it came in
> recently (770b6cb)
>
> what about changing this to 'if ARCH_OMAP2PLUS || ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM'?
Fine with me in general, but the patch I posted would be the more
conservative choice for
On 01/21/2013 11:41 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 21 January 2013, Rob Clark wrote:
Are you sure OMAP2_DSS requires ARCH_OMAP2PLUS? I don't see this, and
it at least used to not depend on ARCH_OMAP2PLUS. If it does now, I
think the correct fix would be to remove the dependency in OMAP2_DS
On Monday 21 January 2013, Rob Clark wrote:
> Are you sure OMAP2_DSS requires ARCH_OMAP2PLUS? I don't see this, and
> it at least used to not depend on ARCH_OMAP2PLUS. If it does now, I
> think the correct fix would be to remove the dependency in OMAP2_DSS. I
> don't think removing ARCH_MULTI
On 01/21/2013 11:26 AM, Rob Clark wrote:
On 01/21/2013 11:16 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
The omapdrm driver is incorrectly flagged to allow building
on non-omap platforms, when ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM is set.
This does not work, because it unconditionally selects
the OMAP2_DSS symbol that only works on
On 01/21/2013 11:16 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
The omapdrm driver is incorrectly flagged to allow building
on non-omap platforms, when ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM is set.
This does not work, because it unconditionally selects
the OMAP2_DSS symbol that only works on OMAP.
The problem was introduced in 5e3b0
The omapdrm driver is incorrectly flagged to allow building
on non-omap platforms, when ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM is set.
This does not work, because it unconditionally selects
the OMAP2_DSS symbol that only works on OMAP.
The problem was introduced in 5e3b087499 "staging:
drm/omap: add support for ARCH_
12 matches
Mail list logo
