[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: New proposed DRM interface design
    Christoph Hellwig wrote:
    > On Sat, Sep 04, 2004 at 10:45:33AM +0100, Keith Whitwell wrote:
    >>>Umm, the Linux kernel isn't about minimizing interfaces. We don't link a
    >>>copy of scsi helpers into each scsi driver either, or libata into each sata
    >>But regular users don't tend to pull down new scsi or ata drivers in the same
    >>way that they do graphics drivers. Hence the concern of many drm developers
    >>to avoid introducing new failure modes in this process.
    > Actually regulat users do. And they do by pulling an uptodate kernel or
    > using a vendor kernel with backports. This model would work for video drivers
    > aswell.

    Sure, explain to me how I should upgrade my RH-9 system to work on my new i915?

    I'm not a big fan of the DRM code either, it's ironic that I'm in a position
    where I'm defending it. Thanks to the cleanup work Dave is doing though it is
    improving after a long period of neglect.

    However, introducing a new binary interface isn't going to magically transform
    a fairly neglected codebase into a sparkly new one. All I can really see it
    doing is saving a few K of memory in the hetrogenous dual head case. Oh, and
    introducing a new failure mode to be debugged at a distance.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:05    [W:0.023 / U:0.068 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site