Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:01:19 +1000 | From | Gareth Hughes <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.4.6-ac3 |
| |
Alan Cox wrote: > > DRM 4.1 is something that needs discussion rather than being ignored. I sort > of expect it to look like XFree code anyway and I can see bits of the macro > stuff will really help with the *BSD code
Some of the discussions I've had with various people regarding the DRM make me think people miss how tightly coupled the 3 parts of a full DRI driver are (the other two parts being the XFree86 2D driver and the client-side 3D driver). It's not like the various interfaces between the 3 parts are changed for the fun of it. Granted, issues of backwards compatibility haven't been handled well in the past, but with the next resync I believe that moving forward this will no longer be a problem. You'd have to talk to the guys at VA about this, however.
Portability and maintainability were certainly two motivating factors in the move to a templated architecture for the core DRM. I just got sick of seeing the same code in every driver -- kinda defeats the purpose of having a "core" DRM if it isn't being used... New drivers are much easier to write as well, which is a nice side-effect.
-- Gareth - 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/
|  |