Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <07be6d9a85b6be655fc2b084be81d8bf9715b57a.camel@nxp.com>
References: <cover.1529091248.git.leonard.crestez@nxp.com> <47ea7572011735b68a8a70f0e11bdf00cb2fd86a.1529091248.git.leonard.crestez@nxp.com>
 <CAOMZO5B8i0gN+rCq-yPrd112NkwJWTxYCtsLVeLhD1JLRuX6EQ@mail.gmail.com> <07be6d9a85b6be655fc2b084be81d8bf9715b57a.camel@nxp.com>
From:   Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Jun 2018 18:05:50 -0300
Message-ID: <CAOMZO5BnOpaCzK1Sq=CUPaO6Yh8bE6v=8dmN5pxTKpwqjM1Qfw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] drm: mxsfb: Change driver.name to mxsfb-drm
To:     Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@nxp.com>
Cc:     "stefan@agner.ch" <stefan@agner.ch>,
        "marex@denx.de" <marex@denx.de>, dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@nxp.com>,
        "linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "marcofrk@gmail.com" <marcofrk@gmail.com>,
        "dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        "shawnguo@kernel.org" <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "l.stach@pengutronix.de" <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
        "kernel@pengutronix.de" <kernel@pengutronix.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 5:58 PM, Leonard Crestez
<leonard.crestez@nxp.com> wrote:

> In that thread there is a proposal for removing the old fbdev/mxsfb
> driver entirely.
>
> That would break old DTBs, isn't this generally considered bad? Also,
> are we sure the removal of fbdev/mxsfb wouldn't lose any features?

Yes, I also think we should not break old dtb's.

> What my series does is make both drivers work with the same kernel
> image and turns the choice into a board-level dtb decision. Supporting
> everything at once seems desirable to me and it allows for a very
> smooth upgrade path.
>
> The old driver could be removed later, after all users are converted.

Agreed.

Maybe the mxs fbdev driver needs to warn users saying that that the
driver is deprecated and the bindings need to be updated to the DRM
bindings style.