Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1506157 > unrolled thread

[PATCH libdrm 2/2] Silence runtime complaints on platform devices

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  [PATCH libdrm 2/2] Silence runtime complaints on platform devices Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> - 2016-10-21 19:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH libdrm 2/2] Silence runtime complaints on platform devices Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 19:40 +0200
    Re: [PATCH libdrm 2/2] Silence runtime complaints on platform devices Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@gmail.com> - 2016-10-24 13:20 +0200
      Re: [PATCH libdrm 2/2] Silence runtime complaints on platform devices Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> - 2016-10-24 18:40 +0200

#1506157 — [PATCH libdrm 2/2] Silence runtime complaints on platform devices

glxgears was spamming this 12 times at startup because of Mesa's
probing of the DRM device code, which doesn't support platform
devices.

Signed-off-by: Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>
---
 xf86drm.c | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/xf86drm.c b/xf86drm.c
index 9b52889e4cef..52add5e441d7 100644
--- a/xf86drm.c
+++ b/xf86drm.c
@@ -3149,7 +3149,6 @@ int drmGetDevice(int fd, drmDevicePtr *device)
 
             break;
         default:
-            fprintf(stderr, "The subsystem type is not supported yet\n");
             continue;
         }
 
@@ -3259,7 +3258,6 @@ int drmGetDevices(drmDevicePtr devices[], int max_devices)
 
             break;
         default:
-            fprintf(stderr, "The subsystem type is not supported yet\n");
             continue;
         }
 
-- 
2.9.3

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1506177

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> wrote:
> glxgears was spamming this 12 times at startup because of Mesa's
> probing of the DRM device code, which doesn't support platform
> devices.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>

Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>

> ---
>  xf86drm.c | 2 --
>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/xf86drm.c b/xf86drm.c
> index 9b52889e4cef..52add5e441d7 100644
> --- a/xf86drm.c
> +++ b/xf86drm.c
> @@ -3149,7 +3149,6 @@ int drmGetDevice(int fd, drmDevicePtr *device)
>
>              break;
>          default:
> -            fprintf(stderr, "The subsystem type is not supported yet\n");
>              continue;
>          }
>
> @@ -3259,7 +3258,6 @@ int drmGetDevices(drmDevicePtr devices[], int max_devices)
>
>              break;
>          default:
> -            fprintf(stderr, "The subsystem type is not supported yet\n");
>              continue;
>          }
>
> --
> 2.9.3
>
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1507102

On 21 October 2016 at 18:12, Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> wrote:
> glxgears was spamming this 12 times at startup because of Mesa's
> probing of the DRM device code, which doesn't support platform
> devices.
>
Better option is to add support for platform devices. Can we get
anyone interested in that ?
If we drop (the annoying) printf people will just ignore/forget about
it, and things will fall through the cracks - similar to the 5+ pokes
(at various people) to add support.

On the cool side - it will allow you to use the DRI_PRIME/driconf's
device_id=libudev_path_id_tag to manage the devices on your system.

Thanks
Emil

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1507397

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@gmail.com> writes:

> On 21 October 2016 at 18:12, Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> wrote:
>> glxgears was spamming this 12 times at startup because of Mesa's
>> probing of the DRM device code, which doesn't support platform
>> devices.
>>
> Better option is to add support for platform devices. Can we get
> anyone interested in that ?

I agree it would be good but it certainly isn't remotely near the top of
my todo list.  I'm just fixing up regressions.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web