Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 30 May 2005 13:12:59 +0200 | From | Helge Hafting <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] DRM depends on ??? |
| |
Kyle Moffett wrote:
> On May 29, 2005, at 15:58:10, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >>> What Kyle said is the correct answer... we either keep this lovely >>> construct (I'll add a comment for 2.6.13) or we go back to the old >>> intermodule or module_get stuff... DRM built-in with modular AGP is >>> always >>> wrong... or at least I'll get a hundred e-mails less every month if I >>> say it is .. >> >> >> And what if we don't have AGP at all? Or no PCI? > > > Then DRM detects that at configure time and excludes the code that > requires > AGP. Basically, the following are valid configurations: > > DRM=y AGP=y # DRM will use AGP > DRM=y AGP=n # DRM will not use AGP > > DRM=m AGP=y # DRM will use AGP > DRM=m AGP=m # DRM will use AGP (DRM module depends on AGP module) > DRM=m AGP=n # DRM will not use AGP > > DRM=n AGP=* # DRM isn't compiled and therefore doesn't care about AGP > > The only invalid configuration is DRM=y AGP=m, which seems silly, > although > theoretically in that case DRM should exclude AGP support.
Why is that case invalid? I may have DRM=y so I get DRM on my PCI graphichs card. Then I might load an agp module in order to use agp on *some other* agp card.
I have no problem with DRM=y,AGP=m being invalid for the common single-card setup, but there are multi-card setups too. Not that I need this special case personally - I have two cards but don't use modules.
Helge Hafting
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |