[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fwd: [PATCH 1/2] Framebuffer split

From: Robert Millan
Subject: Re: Fwd: [PATCH 1/2] Framebuffer split
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 21:41:03 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 05:59:11PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> > Considering that vbe.c and sdl.c currently aren't affected a lot
> > whether there is or there isn't encapsulation in place, I'm ok tih
> > encapsulating it but if any driver needs the breach of encapsulation
> > it will be broken and I'll post no opposition to it.
> > I'll do the encapsulation tomorrow.
> Patch attached. One incremental version (for review) and one complete
> (for patching)

Please go ahead (I assume it raises no warnings and it's well tested).

One small detail:

> +  grub_free (mode_list);
> +  mode_list = 0;

I would prefer if we used NULL for pointers.  I know we don't do that
everywhere, but it makes code easier to understand.

Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]