Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 5 Sep 2009 20:02:33 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH v2] viafb: 2D engine rewrite (and viafb patches in general) |
| |
On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 02:38:37 +0200 Florian Tobias Schandinat <FlorianSchandinat@gmx.de> wrote:
> >> I'm going to be doing some work here (writing a > >> driver for the video capture engine), and there's patches sitting in > >> Harald's tree and the OLPC tree. > > > > As far as the rest of the world is concerned, that stuff doesn't exist. > > I'll try to sort out the patches that still add anything to my stuff. I > know Harald's tree and I know that I probably broke every of his > patches. However, he seems to not have done anything for about 3 months > so I rebased/rewrote my patches on linux-2.6 and started sending. I > guess in the meantime I obsolated about half of his patches but there > are still some things I'd like to have (PCI rework, VX855/OLPC support). > Although I'm a bit unsure how to take these things, fix them to apply on > top of my changes and correctly give the original author credit for it.
Sure, that works. Please coordinate with Harald of course, but we do that sort of thing regularly.
> Do you have a pointer to the OLPC tree?
I don't.
> I'd really like to see VX855/OLPC support in mainline as soon as > possible as I consider it a good thing to support "new" hardware early. > However even if I am capable to write such support based on Haralds work > I don't want to see it in mainline as long as no one with that hardware > tested it. > > >> It seems like a central merge point > >> might be a nice thing to have. > >> > >> I'd be happy to run such a tree. I'm really *not* qualified to be > >> passing judgment on patches to the framebuffer driver at this point, > >> though, so I'm not sure that I'm the best person for the job. > > > > Send 'em over. I haven't heard anything from the original viafb > > submitters for a long time. Hopefully Florian has time to help out > > with some review-n-test. > > I do not object against a tree that collects all viafb patches, I even > could do it. But one should really send the patches to Andrew ASAP as > otherwise we may end up with a dead forest ;) > Actually it would be very nice to see some more activity around viafb. > It might be bad if I'm the only one who patches it and who knows how it > works. Discussion can be quite inspiring. > > I'll do the things I can. But in the next few weeks I'll be probably a > bit short on time. Okay I guess I won't do any big patches for a while > but wait until some patches advance or receive some comments. So I still > have some time to review-n-test but expect some delay. In the long run > my test platform might become better as I'll be able to 'revive' some > old VIA boards currently not available for testing. >
Sounds good, thanks. Things appear to be going OK from where I sit (famous last words ;))
| |