Jon Smirl wrote:
--- Otto Solares [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How can i interface with your changes?, currently i open the fbdev,
mmap fb and mmio region, set desired fbdev mode, load r200 dso, pull hooks
and
everything is ok from there. The only thing i dislike with the current
aproach
is that we
Mr. Morton,
diff -bBpur fix/drivers/char/drm/drm_agpsupport.h
linux-2.6.0-test9-mm2/drivers/char/drm/drm_agpsupport.h
--- fix/drivers/char/drm/drm_agpsupport.h 2003-11-06 00:49:53.299160210 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.0-test9-mm2/drivers/char/drm/drm_agpsupport.h 2003-11-06
00:27:43.0
Mr. Vindenes,
--- Ronny V. Vindenes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2003-11-05 at 23:44, Michel Dänzer wrote:
There's a patch in -mm2 that does something with drm/agp (haven't looked
at it yet):
+drm-agp-module-dependency-fix.patch
Maybe fix DRM-AGP module
I'm working on a function like the one below for copying out the VBIOS ROM. This
would make a good candidate for a device indepenent DRM IOCTL (with a callout
for the bug fix). This is something that really should be fixed in X. Mapping
the ROM in from user space without the kernel's knowledge is
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 02:03:13PM -0700, Brian Paul wrote:
Jon Smirl wrote:
--- Otto Solares [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How can i interface with your changes?, currently i open the fbdev,
mmap fb and mmio region, set desired fbdev mode, load r200 dso, pull hooks
and
everything is ok from
Is there any special reason that user space and kernel drivers don't share the
same header files for IOCTL numbers and structures? I'm working on the radeon
ones and the structures match between the two sets of header files but there are
spelling and capitalization variations. For example:
Jon Smirl wrote:
Is there any special reason that user space and kernel drivers don't share the
same header files for IOCTL numbers and structures? I'm working on the radeon
ones and the structures match between the two sets of header files but there are
spelling and capitalization variations.
Please do not reply to this email: if you want to comment on the bug, go to
the URL shown below and enter your comments there.
http://bugs.xfree86.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply to this email: if you want to comment on the bug, go to
the URL shown below and enter your comments there.
http://bugs.xfree86.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply to this email: if you want to comment on the bug, go to
the URL shown below and enter your comments there.
http://bugs.xfree86.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply to this email: if you want to comment on the bug, go to
the URL shown below and enter your comments there.
http://bugs.xfree86.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply to this email: if you want to comment on the bug, go to
the URL shown below and enter your comments there.
http://bugs.xfree86.org/show_bug.cgi?id=131
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply to this email: if you want to comment on the bug, go to
the URL shown below and enter your comments there.
http://bugs.xfree86.org/show_bug.cgi?id=185
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Hello,
i stumbled across the above mentioned define and
related code in the XFree86 sources (lnx_video.c).
comparing X4.1.0 and X4.3.0 i found that the
condtitnal coding of if (base % size) has
vanished at some point in time and the handling
is now hardcoded at this code location.
to my best
14 matches
Mail list logo
