Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2020 16:30:40 +0200 From: Niclas Zeising <zeising@freebsd.org> To: meloun.michal@gmail.com, Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r364737 - head/sys/dev/drm2 Message-ID: <ac26fa5c-f5c5-0e3a-85c8-574e4ab3f979@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <6a57348b-213a-8535-e36b-b09be14eb934@gmail.com> References: <202008242253.07OMrNO2016612@repo.freebsd.org> <790db2ea-0877-671e-e48f-ec6da42c7437@gmail.com> <20200901151635.91c121acb2bf58e9282aa6ae@bidouilliste.com> <235f7f25-4e38-9154-e990-11aa6f8464d4@freebsd.org> <6a57348b-213a-8535-e36b-b09be14eb934@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2020-09-01 16:10, Michal Meloun wrote: >=20 >=20 > On 01.09.2020 15:32, Niclas Zeising wrote: >> On 2020-09-01 15:16, Emmanuel Vadot wrote: >>> On Tue, 1 Sep 2020 15:13:53 +0200 >>> Michal Meloun <meloun.michal@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 25.08.2020 0:53, Niclas Zeising wrote: >>>>> Author: zeising (doc,ports committer) >>>>> Date: Mon Aug 24 22:53:23 2020 >>>>> New Revision: 364737 >>>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/364737 >>>>> >>>>> Log: >>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 drm2: Update deprecation message >>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 Update the deprecation message in the dr= m2 (aka legacy drm) >>>>> drivers to point >>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 towards the graphics/drm-kmod ports for all architect= ures, not >>>>> just amd64. >>>> Only known user of drm2 is arm/tegra124 based boards. How >>>> graphics/drm-kmod can help for these? >>>> Or be more specific - drm2 allows me to hot-plug monitor to tegra ba= sed >>>> board an use 2 scaled overlay planes (which is exactly whats I want = for >>>> =C2=A0 my application). Which alternative can you offer me? >>>> Btw, as you can see, the maintenance cost of drm2 is close to zero a= nd >>>> the dev/drm2 code does not inherit with any of the major architectur= es. >>>> >>>> Michal >>> >>> =C2=A0 I think that the goal was only to mfc this to warn users befo= re 12.2 >>> is branched, maybe a direct commit to 12 would have been better. >>> >> >> No, the change is correct. >> drm-legacy-kmod (the port) is going away, especially on FreeBSD 13, >> since it is preventing updates to the FreeBSD VM subsystem.=C2=A0 I se= nt >> an-email about this to a variety of lists about a week ago. >> I do know that there are a few special users of drm2 in FreeBSD curren= t, >> I do not know how those are affected.=C2=A0 Since, on FreeBSD current,= most >> architectures can use drm-kmod, I believe it is good to point everyone >> towards that ports, instead of pointing everyone except amd64 users to >> drm-legacy-kmod. >=20 > No, this change is not correct. > You *newly* point ARM drm2 users to use a port marked with > "ONLY_FOR_ARCHS=3D amd64 i386 powerpc64" > Do you think that this is correct behavior? >=20 > So again. I have not a single problem with drm-legacy-kmod removal, > I have not a problem with pointing users of supported architectures (by > kmod-*) to right port. > But I have problem with marking drm2 driver as obsolete for ARM > architecture (without single rational reason) and/or by pointing ARM > users of drm2 driver to not-existent port. > Michal >=20 I am only improving an already existing message. Previously, it would=20 point people to drm-legacy-kmod on all architectures except amd64. This=20 is wrong, since drm-legacy-kmod will be removed. drm-legacy-kmod is=20 causing issues and preventing updates to other areas of FreeBSD, as I=20 clearly stated in an email sent to current, ports, x11 and stable=20 mailing lists. drm-current-kmod is only available on i386, amd64 and=20 powerpc64. drm-devel-kmod is available on further architectures,=20 covering almost all of the FreeBSD on desktop segment. With the work manu is doing, this will improve further. For FreeBSD 12, the situation is slightly different, since=20 drm-fbsd12.1-kmod has less support. However, drm-legacy is available in=20 base there, and once again, with the work manu is doing, support for=20 further architectures might be possible even on FreeBSD 12. I have no objections if you want to opt out of the message on your tegra=20 boards, but I do not want us to point users to a port that is deprecated=20 and slated for removal. Regards --=20 Niclas Zeising
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ac26fa5c-f5c5-0e3a-85c8-574e4ab3f979>