On 2/23/2026 2:02 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 12:40:10AM +0530, Mahadevan P wrote:
On targets with multiple display subsystems, such as SA8775P, the GPU
binds to the first display subsystem that probes. This implicit binding
prevents subsequent display subsystems from probing successfully,
breaking multi-display support.

Enable separate_gpu_kms by default to decouple GPU and display subsystem
probing. This allows each display subsystem to initialize independently,
ensuring that all display subsystems are probed.

Signed-off-by: Mahadevan P <[email protected]>
---
Depends on:
        [1]
        
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
        [2]
        
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/

What exactly depends on this patchset?
The dependency is as follows:
As we separate out module loading of adreno and mdss with separate_gpu_kms=1 autoloading of msm.ko fails. With change [1] on bootup, msm.ko is loaded and gpu card is created.

The main reason to bring this patch here in upstream is for enabling of dual dpu configuration in Lemans hence added [2] as dependency.


---
  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c | 2 +-
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
index ed2a61c66ac9..65119fb3dfa2 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ static bool modeset = true;
  MODULE_PARM_DESC(modeset, "Use kernel modesetting [KMS] (1=on (default), 
0=disable)");
  module_param(modeset, bool, 0600);
-static bool separate_gpu_kms;
+static bool separate_gpu_kms = true;
  MODULE_PARM_DESC(separate_gpu_drm, "Use separate DRM device for the GPU (0=single 
DRM device for both GPU and display (default), 1=two DRM devices)");
  module_param(separate_gpu_kms, bool, 0400);

The patch LGTM, but I'd prefer to get confirmation from Rob.

BTW: have you tested it with X11? Are you still getting accelerated GPU?

Yes, tested today with X11 app(xterm), GPU rendering is used.


Thanks,
Mahadevan

Reply via email to