Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Jun 2004 19:59:33 +0200 | From | Roger Luethi <> | Subject | Re: Matrox Kconfig |
| |
On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:43:56 +0200, Petr Vandrovec wrote: > On 5 Jun 04 at 13:40, Roger Luethi wrote: > > The descriptions for CONFIG_FB_MATROX_G450 and CONFIG_FB_MATROX_G100A > > in drivers/video/Kconfig (current 2.6) are confusing: Both want to be > > selected for Matrox G100, G200, G400 based video cards. > > > > In the menu, it's > > > > # G100/G200/G400/G450/G550 support (sets FB_MATROX_G100, FB_MATROX_G450) > > # G100/G200/G400 support (sets FB_MATROX_G100) > > # G400 second head support > > > > where the second depends on the first _not_ being selected. > > > > How about this instead? > > > > # Gxxx (generic) (sets FB_MATROX_G100) > > # G400 second head (depends FB_MATROX_GXXX, FB_MATROX_I2C) > > (sets FB_MATROX_G450) > > # G450/550 support (depends on FB_MATROX_GXXX) > > Please no. It was this way in 2.4.x, and I was receiving at least > two complaints a week that their G450 does not work with their > system. > > G400's second head has nothing to do with G450/G550, so there is > no reason why G400 second head should set FB_MATROX_G450...
Sorry, typo. Should have been:
# Gxxx (generic) (sets FB_MATROX_G100) # G400 second head (depends FB_MATROX_GXXX, FB_MATROX_I2C) # (sets FB_MATROX_MAVEN) # G450/550 support (depends on FB_MATROX_GXXX) # (sets FB_MATROX_G450)
> If anything, then let's remove G100/G200/G400 choice completely, > making G450/G550 support unconditional.
That's fine with me, too. As far as I am concerned, you can throw the whole Matrox G??? bunch together :-). It's just the current presentation that is confusing.
Roger - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |