Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 22:41, Ian Romanick wrote:
1. I don't like the hard-coding of 2*1024*1024 as the size of the indirect buffers. This was copied directly from the R200 driver, but I don't like it. We may want to change the size of this buffer at some point, and hard-coding the value into the client-side driver will make that difficult.
2. I don't like the hackish handing of the pre-1.3 DRM case. Are there other PCI IDs that need the 128MB offset? Do we even support the pre-1.3 DRM anymore? If we don't support the pre-1.3 DRM (and don't intend to fix the support), I'd like to chop all the pre-1.3 stuff out. That will make the Radeon driver "look" a lot more like the R200 driver. That's a good thing IMHO.
Why not always use ( ( INREG( RADEON_MC_AGP_LOCATION ) & 0xffff ) << 16 ) + dri_priv->agpTexOffset
as discussed on IRC? This should work with any chip, memory layout, ...
Here's my inner conflict about that. If there's a perfectly good way to get this value with a simple INREG, why is there an ioctl to get it as well?
Oversight on my part. There are so many spaces that these things can be expressed in, I found one that I knew worked for sure (ie that value in the kernel) and ran with it.
Anyway, is an ioctl really heavier-weight than an INREG?
Keith
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
