Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:af89:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id iu9csp1366139pxb; Fri, 21 Jan 2022 16:39:05 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxSjoQyOx6laDry93LGfJFRhhyTFixc2No4qCNjxy+57fp/cLs8xXkXjMlMGpSJkY2+Ric7 X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:3b05:: with SMTP id d5mr1590357pjc.224.1642811944883; Fri, 21 Jan 2022 16:39:04 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1642811944; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=n2Fjtbupa9XX9NhEbv49+lqnFQVc6OWiGi/ec2jHx14hAnIIWzJW5Q2/xaqzzNUDQN rFHdiY4IykrfFZUYPfGXU88LnUY1hbRVpyt1Xe/XKXKLo20ZZd6Xu8YBeB2E7z+3GzDD Z1XWlN9HkiSNgFTQALHyMCvXB9lJL96x994+DFLWRFtWf6SIsMcVuE88aGu5CyvhQkjJ xe5rme7BsHjk4IC15F//338Z7+p3VXRw2LQOaMu+tWuEBjrshWcyPcwAoAUhDa/rPHo6 eLY1OAbJ9NiZFPVr7O7Fu2Ie1PyhRQuxiMQx61RsbEjIf3N3IY28tTPBeov/4IHPJPpq UrmQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=m2Ho/lCZKO10EzmqqcIcm9qmBssIoEL4oIglAIQFltM=; b=hDz+4nvvnF5BGffePMk/MaKXsbyJaKJ1gZQAV3vGeepwPSOjTKPmx6tya//o0jOkb4 2Q2Lj/2bE278lt2jVdUafuIoMMP3fitX3cGiVxlW4GLRM3vfkoqy4WgE+4p9XIts0vxc RQShhGOG5mSOEt0aJvrhjYCULHm4aBb0f3dqFkGIa0ZF9GcgC0wait+VTDVo4nvMLMHB gXfj0SNTq1gETM0zLxfuhbLChqMBDFLKbGbQGOaqpw9N/a2oIAmCnnxW8d8uvxszdNMX qS9vaJKPGLHky41YLnx5zyr8Gg5XQ2dYkk7sBofVjkeTiJN2nMUie+oYtC0kdGtuU6VI a4Nw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=NkUymEuQ; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id t6si8558120pfj.19.2022.01.21.16.38.52; Fri, 21 Jan 2022 16:39:04 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=NkUymEuQ; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1379329AbiAUH5e (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 21 Jan 2022 02:57:34 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:51341 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1379232AbiAUH4h (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jan 2022 02:56:37 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1642751795; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=m2Ho/lCZKO10EzmqqcIcm9qmBssIoEL4oIglAIQFltM=; b=NkUymEuQfICVF0n6My8trFNrxc1UYZmm2CcebWHGKCjguESu7csN5XnwTJ/WWtIFUgmpYR GCKXWRRkCDnH1N53D49jqHYnzDjxmJpCllho7F/ST4Y/cTOqT0EOm6/5cn84jCa4mDDRv6 fkKka2+B9+jSx6P+Bo4vy6NxrOvAswE= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-308-qmajEbmeOGKJKS2Wspa7_w-1; Fri, 21 Jan 2022 02:56:30 -0500 X-MC-Unique: qmajEbmeOGKJKS2Wspa7_w-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 088D084DA42; Fri, 21 Jan 2022 07:56:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sirius.home.kraxel.org (unknown [10.39.193.47]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22F6970D21; Fri, 21 Jan 2022 07:56:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by sirius.home.kraxel.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A8B8F180060F; Fri, 21 Jan 2022 08:20:06 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 08:20:06 +0100 From: Gerd Hoffmann To: Helge Deller Cc: Thomas Zimmermann , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, Sven Schnelle , Linus Torvalds , Javier Martinez Canillas , Daniel Vetter , Ilia Mirkin , Tomi Valkeinen , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Jani Nikula , Pavel Machek , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Geert Uytterhoeven , Sam Ravnborg , Claudio Suarez Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "fbcon: Disable accelerated scrolling" Message-ID: <20220121072006.ylw2hdl7jbkbwnre@sirius.home.kraxel.org> References: <20220119110839.33187-1-deller@gmx.de> <20220119110839.33187-3-deller@gmx.de> <6c000477-002b-d125-b945-2c4831bad8a5@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6c000477-002b-d125-b945-2c4831bad8a5@gmx.de> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, > > So if this really has to come back then I think the pragmatic approach is > > to do it behind a CONFIG_FBCON_ACCEL, default n, and with a huge warning > > that enabling that shouldn't be done for any distro which only enables > > firmware and drm fbdev drivers. > > Thanks for coming back on this, but quite frankly I don't understand > that request. How should that warning look like, something along: > "BE WARNED: The framebuffer text console on your non-DRM supported > graphic card will then run faster and smoother if you enable this option." > That doesn't make sense. People and distros would want to enable that. Nope. Most distros want disable fbdev drivers rather sooner than later. The fbdev drivers enabled in the fedora kernel today: CONFIG_FB_VGA16=m CONFIG_FB_VESA=y CONFIG_FB_EFI=y CONFIG_FB_SSD1307=m CONFIG_FB_VESA + CONFIG_FB_EFI will go away soon, with simpledrm taking over their role. > And if a distro *just* has firmware and drm fbdev drivers enabled, > none of the non-DRM graphic cards would be loaded anyway and this code > wouldn't be executed anyway. Yes, exactly. That's why there is no point in compiling that code. take care, Gerd