Re: [git pull] drm for rc1

[James Simmons]

> IOW, I'm inclined to just do the revert. The "fix" clearly breaks
> things, and now you're adding random parts of the function back rather
> than just calling the "fill_fix()" function like things used to. Why?

Its not the final patch. I'm trying to get feedback on what broke exactly.

> The commit message in dfe63bb0ad98 doesn't support any of these hacks
> - it just seems to say that drm_fb_helper_fill_fix() should also have
> been called from setcolreg().
>
> So why don't we just revert the commit and instead add that
> drm_fb_helper_fill_fix() to setcolreg()?

Fine by me. The real problem is the nouveau driver is using the 
framebuffer device (fb_fillrect) before set_par is ever called.
Before calling set_par the framebuffer state is not defined.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/