Mike Mestnik wrote:
--- David Bronaugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:I don't think what I was proposing coupled or brought together the two. As I see it, the mode programming code (both DAC and CRTC are rather outmoded terms; think LCD with digital link) is totally separate from the framebuffer management code. The only reason there's even any calling between them is that a side effect of setting a mode is allocating a fresh framebuffer, and wiping out the old one. That, as far as I can see, is the only way they are coupled.
Mike Mestnik wrote:Yes, I think the mode/dac programing code should be seperat from the
0.--- David Bronaugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mike Mestnik wrote:
This is vary good.
- To accomidate mergedfb the number of FBs should be allowed to be
willHowever we need it to? I think if we cripple X the current mergedfbHow does mergedfb work internally? I don't know.
I think this design allows for mergedfb to work "however we need it to" by encapsulating all that (setup) logic within the "Extended DRM"also have to be crippled.
module.
Do you disagree?
frambuffer allocation/mngmnt code. Wather it should live in the DRM is
another story, thought It should live kernel side as it workes closely
with the hardware.
I don't think we're on the same page here. What I'm proposing -is- a pretty static way of doing things -- but my argument about why this is the case is, just how many ways -can- you initialize a mode? Not all that many. Maybe 3 or 4 different ways.A fue other questions, directed at the memory mngmt ppl. What about 2d only page fliping, ModeX and the like? Where these ever supported outside of libsvga? Are thay rellecs from the past that can die?
I think this is the best desing, as it gives the app programer lots ofHopefully modes can be set withought FBs this cuts down on the FBmay
{a,de}lloc code. However inorder to cutdown on card specific code, it
be best for all cards the deal with worst-case FB alloc, if this is tobe
All allocation of framebuffers will happen within the kernel. None will be requested by the mode manager.a feature.
freedom.
Once you've initialized the mode, lots of complications can happen (double buffering, triple buffering, Z buffers, etc) but these can be set up after the mode's set. They don't have to be set up at mode switch time.
I was thinking that if the mode set failed, the ioctl would return an error. Does this sound sane?Allocating a frame buffer may need a FB description header filled out inVT(context).This helps with multi-tasking, I.E. Two apps sharing the same- Have mem free as well as mem total.
anFor multi-headed cards thay will have to share FB resources.
Allocating a FB on some cards may not be a simple as L*H*D. As I'm not- Returning hardware capabilitys(like in a termcap type way), notjust
mem sizes. I.E. zbuffer type(how to know it's size).
expert on hardware I don't know what snags you might hit on, that arenot
whatversion but card dependant.
Hmm... I'd love for you to elaborate here, though I -think- I know
OK; elaborate?you're getting at.I wish I could but I realy don't know, it's just something I think the
desing might need. I used the source and saw into the future.
video memory, taking up some space. The hardware cursor may need to be at
a perticular offset, thus making it immposible for a FB to span that
offset. I guess that since there are an infinet number of reasons a FB
might not be allicatable that it's better of the call to just fail rather
then the lib/app trying to guess that it will. So no communication from
the driver to the app is needed.
David Bronaugh
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: SourceForge.net Broadband Sign-up now for SourceForge Broadband and get the fastest 6.0/768 connection for only $19.95/mo for the first 3 months! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=2562&alloc_id=6184&op=click -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel