[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: FBdev updates.
    On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 03:02:01PM +0000, Dave Jones wrote:
    > On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 01:09:33AM +0000, James Simmons wrote:
    > > New updates to the fbdev layer. You can grab the diff from
    > >
    > James,
    > Whats the current status with matroxfb ? Its been broken
    > for months now, and hasn't seen any progress wrt getting it
    > back on its feet.
    > I understand Petr had some concerns with the new API, but
    > *something* needs to be done to get this back up and running.
    > I'd understand if this was a neglected hardly-used-by-anyone
    > driver, but there's an awful lot of matrox cards out there.
    > This was first reported broken way back in 2.5.53, but I believe
    > was broken even longer before that.

    Since 2.5.51, when rewrite came in...

    You can get patch which reverts most of James's work at

    I was for five weeks in U.S., so I did not do anything with
    matroxfb during that time. I plan to use fillrect and copyrect
    from generic code (although it means unnecessary multiply on
    generic side, and division in matroxfb, but well, if we gave
    up on reasonable speed for fbdev long ago...). But I simply
    want loadfont and putcs hooks for character painting. And if
    fbdev maintainer does not want to give me them, well, then
    matroxfb and fbdev are not compatible.

    I refuse to remove features from matroxfb driver, and textmode
    support is one of current features (needed and required to be
    able to run VMware on fullscreen - and as main part of my
    job happens in VMware...). So there is couple of choices:
    (1) new maintainer, or
    (2) remove matroxfb from kernel, or
    (3) persuade me that I want to write matroxcon and forget about fbcon at all, or
    (4) something else I do not know about.

    Besides that with that strange additional copy in accel_putcs
    I get much slower output than with 2.4.x... and although I
    understand that for 2.6.x we'll all have faster computers than
    we had for 2.4.x, I still think that speed should be primary
    concern, and code extensibility and readability secondary.
    But well, I told it dozens of time, so why I bother. I do
    not want to end up as Larry.
    Petr Vandrovec

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.022 / U:6.444 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site