Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 Mar 2004 13:26:27 +0100 | Subject | Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] Re: [PATCH] Sysfs for framebuffer | From | Sven Luther <> |
| |
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 12:11:00PM +0100, Jan De Luyck wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Monday 22 March 2004 20:57, Greg KH wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 09:50:46AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > I prefere graphics myself. Display sounds to generic. That is what > > > > video and graphics output is piped to. Since fbdev doesn't handle video > > > > ouput normally this is kind of fuzzy sounding. > > > > > > I still prefer display... > > > > Bah, I don't want to argue here. I've applied Kronos's patch as is to > > my device-2.6 tree which will end up in the next -mm release. > > > > I'll hold off forwarding this patch to Linus until after 2.6.5 is out, > > so that gives everyone a few days in which to argue the name a bunch and > > then send me a patch that changes it to the decided apon name (if it is > > to be changed.) > > - From a users point of view: if there are only to be framebuffer devices listed > in this class, why not call it just what it is: "Framebuffer" ? Naming it > after something it is only in a broad sense makes no sense to me. I'd be > looking in /sys/.../framebuffer instead of /sys/.../graphics or /display.
Notice that /display is what is used by most OF implementations, so this kinda makes sense. I would vote like BenH on this if i was consulted.
> Display would be the EDID info of my screen (physical), and graphics... > well... I'd half expect something like capture cards to be there...
But this also makes sense, still, i guess we are concerned with more info than just the framebuffer, right ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther - 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/
| |