lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: radeon-pre-2
    >
    > > Alan, I agree with how you want to proceed with this, and keep things
    > > stable, but anything short of a single card-specific driver looking after
    > > the registers and DMA queueing and locking is going to have deficiencies
    > > and the DRM has a better basis than the fb drivers,
    >
    > "I want to own it, mine mine". Pathetic really isn't it. The FB writers
    > I've no doubt think they should own it and their code is better too.
    > They also support a lot more hardware than you do of course, and on
    > platforms that DRI doesn't support.

    I actually don't give a rats arse who owns it, this isn't a them and us
    despite these rather obvious attempts to make it so.. this is a who writes
    the code and does the design and at the moment I'm seeing you and Jon with
    differing view points, and I'm trying to get both sides to figure out what
    needs to be done, I'll gladly review any changes for the drm but saying
    it's a DRI vs kernel is a very small minded view that I don't really care
    for..

    The worst things that will happen for all concerened is this:
    Jon does all this work on a merged solution outside the kernel, and it
    works well, and the X team decide to do a decent X on mesa-solo on Jons
    super-DRM, now the super-DRM gets pushed via the X tree and distributions
    start relasing kernels with it merged into it and it never goes into the
    main tree... it won't matter, RH/SuSE/whomever will want to pick up the
    new features for the *enhanced user experience* and people will give out
    about not being able to use Linus's kernels and it'll be a bit of a big
    mess sort of like when the DRM came out first... now I think X is
    probably the only project that can push this sort of change without
    kernel developer consent, I personally would rather this didn't happen,

    I think yourself and Linus's ideas for a locking scheme look good, I also
    know they won't please Jon too much as he can see where the potential
    ineffecienes with saving/restore card state on driver swap are, especailly
    on running fbcon and X on a dual-head card with different users.

    Dave.

    --
    David Airlie, Software Engineer
    http://www.skynet.ie/~airlied / airlied at skynet.ie
    pam_smb / Linux DECstation / Linux VAX / ILUG person

    -
    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: 2005-03-22 14:06    [W:0.026 / U:0.160 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site