![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On So 03-06-06 07:25:13, Antonino A. Daplas wrote: > David Lang wrote: > > On Sat, 3 Jun 2006, Pavel Machek wrote: > >> I'm not talking about reading speed, I'm talking about displaying > >> speed. Once you display more than refresh rate times screen > >> size... you may as well cheat -- xterm-like. If xterm detects too much > >> stuff is being displayed, it simply stops displaying it, only > >> refreshing screen few times a second... > > > > That would work, however AFAIK it's not implemented in any existing > > framebuffer. > > Besides implementaton, the main concern with this is that you might miss > a very important kernel message. Though one can always use the scrollback > buffer. Well, you can only miss a message *you would not see anyway*. I guess the main concern is that it tends to look ugly on the screen (and it will not be quite easy code). Anyway, no, I do not think it is needed. framebuffers are fast enough these days. When I used to have 300MHz toshiba laptop with UHCI bogging down the system, something like that would be handy... (2sec to do screen update in loaded-with-usb cases). Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-06-03 08:36 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||