svn commit: r364737 - head/sys/dev/drm2

[Niclas Zeising]

On 2020-09-01 16:10, Michal Meloun wrote:
> 
> 
> 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 at 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:
>>>>>     drm2: Update deprecation message
>>>>>        Update the deprecation message in the drm2 (aka legacy drm)
>>>>> drivers to point
>>>>>     towards the graphics/drm-kmod ports for all architectures, 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 based
>>>> board an use 2 scaled overlay planes (which is exactly whats I want for
>>>>    my application). Which alternative can you offer me?
>>>> Btw, as you can see, the maintenance cost of drm2 is close to zero and
>>>> the dev/drm2 code does not inherit with any of the major architectures.
>>>>
>>>> Michal
>>>
>>>    I think that the goal was only to mfc this to warn users before 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.  I sent
>> 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 current,
>> I do not know how those are affected.  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.
> 
> No, this change is not correct.
> You *newly* point ARM drm2 users to use a port marked with
> "ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= amd64 i386 powerpc64"
> Do you think that this is correct behavior?
> 
> 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
> 

I am only improving an already existing message.  Previously, it would 
point people to drm-legacy-kmod on all architectures except amd64.  This 
is wrong, since drm-legacy-kmod will be removed.  drm-legacy-kmod is 
causing issues and preventing updates to other areas of FreeBSD, as I 
clearly stated in an email sent to current, ports, x11 and stable 
mailing lists.  drm-current-kmod is only available on i386, amd64 and 
powerpc64.  drm-devel-kmod is available on further architectures, 
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 
drm-fbsd12.1-kmod has less support.  However, drm-legacy is available in 
base there, and once again, with the work manu is doing, support for 
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 
boards, but I do not want us to point users to a port that is deprecated 
and slated for removal.
Regards
-- 
Niclas Zeising