Em Wed, 25 Apr 2018 12:47:34 +0200
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz escreveu:
> On Monday, April 23, 2018 10:55:57 AM Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > Em Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:47:28 +0200
> > Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz escreveu:
> >
> > > On Friday,
On 25/04/18 14:13, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> On Monday, April 23, 2018 05:11:14 PM Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>> On 23/04/18 16:56, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>
>>> Ideally we should be able to build both drivers in the same kernel
>>> (especially as modules).
>>>
>>> I was hoping
On Monday, April 23, 2018 05:11:14 PM Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 23/04/18 16:56, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> > Ideally we should be able to build both drivers in the same kernel
> > (especially as modules).
> >
> > I was hoping that it could be fixed easily but then I discovered
> >
On Monday, April 23, 2018 10:55:57 AM Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:47:28 +0200
> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz escreveu:
>
> > On Friday, April 20, 2018 01:42:51 PM Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > > Add stubs for omapfb_dss.h, in the case it is
Hi Tomi,
On Wednesday, 25 April 2018 13:10:43 EEST Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 25/04/18 13:02, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 25 April 2018 12:33:53 EEST Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> >> On 25/04/18 12:03, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >>> Could we trim down omapfb to remove support for the
On 25/04/18 13:02, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Tomi,
>
> On Wednesday, 25 April 2018 12:33:53 EEST Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>> On 25/04/18 12:03, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>>> Could we trim down omapfb to remove support for the devices supported by
>>> omapdrm ?
>>
>> I was thinking about just that.
Hi Tomi,
On Wednesday, 25 April 2018 12:33:53 EEST Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 25/04/18 12:03, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > Could we trim down omapfb to remove support for the devices supported by
> > omapdrm ?
>
> I was thinking about just that. But, of course, it's not quite
> straightforward
On 25/04/18 12:03, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Could we trim down omapfb to remove support for the devices supported by
> omapdrm ?
I was thinking about just that. But, of course, it's not quite
straightforward either.
We've got DSI manual update functionality in OMAP3-OMAP5 SoCs, which
covers a
Hi Tomi,
On Wednesday, 25 April 2018 09:24:14 EEST Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 23/04/18 23:09, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> >> I don't think it's worth it renaming the common symbols. They will change
> >> over time as omapdrm is under heavy rework, and it's painful enough
> >> without having to
On 23/04/18 23:09, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
>> I don't think it's worth it renaming the common symbols. They will change
>> over
>> time as omapdrm is under heavy rework, and it's painful enough without
>> having
>> to handle cross-tree changes.
>
> It could just rename the
On Monday, 23 April 2018 23:09:55 EEST Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Laurent Pinchart escreveu:
> > On Monday, 23 April 2018 17:22:27 EEST Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > > Em Mon, 23 Apr 2018 15:56:53 +0200 Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz escreveu:
> > > > On
Em Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:48:06 +0300
Laurent Pinchart escreveu:
> Hi Mauro,
>
> On Monday, 23 April 2018 17:22:27 EEST Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > Em Mon, 23 Apr 2018 15:56:53 +0200 Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz escreveu:
> > > On Monday, April 23, 2018
Hi Mauro,
On Monday, 23 April 2018 17:22:27 EEST Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Mon, 23 Apr 2018 15:56:53 +0200 Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz escreveu:
> > On Monday, April 23, 2018 02:47:28 PM Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >> On Friday, April 20, 2018 01:42:51 PM Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:11:14 +0300
Tomi Valkeinen escreveu:
> On 23/04/18 16:56, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> > Ideally we should be able to build both drivers in the same kernel
> > (especially as modules).
> >
> > I was hoping that it could be fixed easily but
Em Mon, 23 Apr 2018 15:56:53 +0200
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz escreveu:
> On Monday, April 23, 2018 02:47:28 PM Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > On Friday, April 20, 2018 01:42:51 PM Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > > Add stubs for omapfb_dss.h, in the case it is
On 23/04/18 16:56, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> Ideally we should be able to build both drivers in the same kernel
> (especially as modules).
>
> I was hoping that it could be fixed easily but then I discovered
> the root source of the problem:
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/display.o:
On Monday, April 23, 2018 02:47:28 PM Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> On Friday, April 20, 2018 01:42:51 PM Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > Add stubs for omapfb_dss.h, in the case it is included by
> > some driver when CONFIG_FB_OMAP2 is not defined, with can
> > happen on ARM when DRM_OMAP is
Em Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:47:28 +0200
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz escreveu:
> On Friday, April 20, 2018 01:42:51 PM Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > Add stubs for omapfb_dss.h, in the case it is included by
> > some driver when CONFIG_FB_OMAP2 is not defined, with can
> >
On Friday, April 20, 2018 01:42:51 PM Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Add stubs for omapfb_dss.h, in the case it is included by
> some driver when CONFIG_FB_OMAP2 is not defined, with can
> happen on ARM when DRM_OMAP is not 'n'.
>
> That allows building such driver(s) with COMPILE_TEST.
>
>
Add stubs for omapfb_dss.h, in the case it is included by
some driver when CONFIG_FB_OMAP2 is not defined, with can
happen on ARM when DRM_OMAP is not 'n'.
That allows building such driver(s) with COMPILE_TEST.
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab
---
20 matches
Mail list logo