Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: sm750fb: avoid conflicting vesafb

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 02:54:29PM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 02:54:51PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 01:43:34PM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 09:32:57PM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > > > From: Teddy Wang <teddy.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > 
> > > > If vesafb is enabled in the config then /dev/fb0 is created by vesa
> > > > and this sm750 driver gets fb1, fb2. But we need to be fb0 and fb1 to
> > > > effectively work with xorg.
> > > > So if it has been alloted fb1, then try to remove the other fb0.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Teddy Wang <teddy.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > 
> > > Hi Greg,
> > > You applied the second patch but not this one. Did I miss any review
> > > comments from you about this one?
> > 
> > All of the other complaints about this patch were not sufficient for me
> > to justify ignoring it?  Why would I not listen to them?
> 
> This patch is doing what all the drm drivers are doing. So you want
> us to do something completely new rather than following the established
> practice of a drm driver?

I despise cargo-cult programming.  You could not answer the "why", so
why would I accept such a patch?

greg k-h