On Fri, 2004-04-16 at 23:02, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Michel DÃnzer wrote: > > On Thu, 2004-04-15 at 22:00, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > > > >>This is a diff for drivers/char/drm to make r128 use userland-loadable > >>firmware. > > > > Sigh, is this really necessary? :\ > It allows for the microcode to be updated without replacing the kernel, > which is not a bad thing anyway.
I'm not sure it ever has changed or will change... we both know the background of this; IMHO it's an inconvenience for users for little or no gain of freedom. > >>It's completely untested (since I don't *have* an r128, I don't > >>see any way to test it), but I bet it'll work; the firmware loading interface > >>seems remarkably easy to use. > > > > Its return code should probably be checked and propagated though? The > > DRM doesn't work without the microcode. > OK; I'm not surprised at that. I'm not entirely clear where the return > code needs to be returned in order to fail properly, though. > r128_do_init_cce returns an int; is it sufficient to propagate the error > code out of there? Yes, the return code of r128_do_init_cce() is used directly as the return code of the ioctl in r128_cce_init(). > I was working from the versions in the Linux kernel source, since that's > the only version I actually intended to change, and because I could > figure out the tree. Should I be looking elsewhere? I couldn't figure > out where the files were in the DRI CVS tree... *spends extra hour > looking* OK, are they visible at > http://dri.freedesktop.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/dri/drm/ ? Yes, that's the new standalone DRM module. > Hmm. What's the Best Way to abstract away OS/kernel differences in this > case? I had this thought: > * shared/r128_drv.h contains the prototype for the new (error-returning) > r128_cce_load_firmware > * shared/r128_firmware.c contains the old, hard-coded firmware as an > implementation of that > * linux/r128_firmware_loader.c contains the firmware loading version as > an implementation of that > * bsd/r128/Makefile adds r128_firmware.c to SRCS > * linux/Makefile.kernel adds r128_firmware.o *or* r128_firmware_loader.o > to r128-objs, depending on a kernel version check. Similarly for > linux/Makefile.linux and R128SHARED. Sounds viable, but maybe it could be done simpler in drm_os_*.h? (r128 and radeon could possibly share the code?) > linux/Kconfig adds "select FW_LOADER" to the DRM_R128 section... > depending on a kernel version check? (I dunno how to depend on that in > a Kconfig file.) I think Kconfig is 2.6 only. -- Earthling Michel DÃnzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer Libre software enthusiast | http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
