lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: New proposed DRM interface design
I might move stuff like AGP support into the core. The core is the most
OS specific piece of code. So anything that is very specific to the
kernel API should be in it.

I would split like this:
drm_core - OS specific code, all global things
drm_library - shared code, not OS specific
driver

Then drm_core would always be bundled with the OS.

Is there any real advantage to spliting core/library and creating three
interface compatibily problems?

Stuff like this should probably be an inline...
#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE <= 0x020402
up( &current->mm->mmap_sem );
#else
up_write( &current->mm->mmap_sem );
#endif

What about the VM page fault routines with 2.4 vs 2.6 differences?
How about HAS_WORKQUEUE?


=====
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@yahoo.com



_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
-
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 14:05    [W:0.186 / U:9.196 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site