From: Otto S. <so...@gu...> - 2004-01-06 02:25:39
|
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 01:09:47PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > Agree. Problem is that sysfs stuff is very invasive i think and it > > will be hard to push even on development trees like -mm ones. An > > ioctl could be something simple as passing a pointer to a buffer > > of fixed length, the best imho would be extend fb_fix_screeninfo > > struct to accomodate a 'char busid[16];' but that could break > > binary compatibility. If 2.6 break from 2.4 we could put it > > there as anyway apps need to recompile. Shame that there are > > not sufficient 'reserved' bits. > > We can just add it to fb_info and return if from an ioctl... Great! hopefully James will agree!.. :) -solca |