[lkml]   [2011]   [Sep]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Proposal for a low-level Linux display framework
    On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Felipe Contreras
    <> wrote:
    > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Alan Cox <> wrote:
    >>> One of my biggest problems with KMS is that it has (naturally) a lot more
    >>> complexity than the fb API which leads to instability. Basically it's very
    >> It shouldn't do - and a sample of one (your machine) is not a
    >> statistically valid set. Fb is pretty much ununsable in contrast on my
    >> main box, but that's not a statistically valid sample either.
    >> I'm not that convinced by the complexity either. For a simple video card
    >> setup such as those that the fb layer can kind of cope with (ie linear
    >> buffer, simple mode changes, no client rendering, no vblank flipping,
    >> limited mode management, no serious multi-head) a DRM driver is also
    >> pretty tiny and simple.
    > That's not true, many drivers work around the lack of features in the
    > fb API by providing custom interfaces. For example, in omapfb it's
    > possible to use the overlays from user-space, configure some YUV
    > format, do vsink, and multipages just fine:
    > It's perfect to render video clips. Of course, it would be even better
    > if those custom interfaces were merged into the fb API.

    fwiw, as was mentioned earlier in the thread, there is already an
    effort underway for a standardized overlay interface for KMS:

    Anyways, it is also possible to extend DRM drivers w/ custom API.. and
    even possible extend the fbdev on top of DRM/KMS with custom
    interfaces if you *really* wanted to. I have some patches somewhere
    that add support a portion of the omapfb ioctls to the fbdev layer in
    omapdrm driver for the benefit of some legacy display test app. If
    someone really wanted to, I guess there is no reason that you couldn't
    support all of the omapfb custom ioctls.

    From userspace perspective, fbdev doesn't go away. It is just a
    legacy interface provided on top of DRM/KMS driver mostly via helper
    functions. With this approach, you get the richer KMS API (and all
    the related plumbing for hotplug, EDID parsing, multi-head support,
    flipping, etc) for userspace stuff that needs that, but can keep the
    fbdev userspace interface for legacy apps. It is the best of both
    worlds. There isn't really any good reason to propagate standalone
    fbdev driver anymore.


    > --
    > Felipe Contreras
    > _______________________________________________
    > dri-devel mailing list

     \ /
      Last update: 2011-09-17 17:19    [W:0.026 / U:77.536 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site