lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] gma500: Intel GMA500 staging driver
    On 02/22/2011 04:40 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
    > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:17:46PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
    >> This is an initial staging driver for the GMA500. It's been stripped out
    >> of the PVR drivers and crunched together from various bits of code and
    >> different kernels.
    >>
    >> Currently it's unaccelerated but still pretty snappy even compositing with
    >> the frame buffer X server.
    >>
    >> Lots of work is needed to rework the ttm and bo interfaces from being
    >> ripped out and then 2D acceleration wants putting back for framebuffer
    >> and somehow eventually via DRM.

    >> +++ b/drivers/staging/gma500/psb_intel_sdvo.c
    > Does PSB really support SDVO? I thought by that period the only thing
    > it'd be used for was plug-in SDVO cards, which doesn't seem so likely
    > with PSB.
    >
    The Fit-PC2 needs SDVO for its DVI/HDMI output. The SDVO chip is likely
    put directly on the PCB.
    I tried to write my own driver for the gma500 (called it i500) which had
    all the SDVO stuff in place,
    but I never sorted out the TTM stuff so it's been gathering dust for
    quite some time now.
    >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/gma500/psb_ttm_fence.c b/drivers/staging/gma500/psb_ttm_fence.c
    > This really looks like it's intended to be core TTM functionality, so it
    > should probably go past dri-devel.
    >
    > This is definitely the best gma500 driver we've seen yet, but it seems
    > like there's two directions it can go. If the intention for now is to
    > provide a kernel-quality unaccelerated 2D driver then there's a *lot*
    > more code that can just be ripped out. If we want the acceleration to
    > work then there's an argument that we should be abstracting that into a
    > more generic SGX layer that other drivers can make use of. Does omapfb
    > have any acceleration? If so, is there anything we can build on there?
    From what I can see, omapfb doesn't have any acceleration,
    and yes, it would be very nice to have a generic SGX layer.

    Cheers
    Patrik Jakobsson


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2011-02-23 00:01    [W:4.078 / U:0.268 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site