On Sat, 2004-06-05 at 12:21 +0300, Ville SyrjÃlà wrote: > On Sat, Jun 05, 2004 at 03:09:54AM -0400, Patrick McFarland wrote: > > > > expose 2D and 3D hardware acceleration > > functions, allow applications (DirectFB, xservers) to query the > > available acceleration methods, > > I disagree. > > This part of the kernel should be as dumb as possible. I think the best > interface would be simply one accepting almost complete DMA buffers. The > only thing missing from these buffers would be real memory addresses.
I'm not sure about that; pseudo-command buffers that the DRM parses and generates the actual DMA buffers from on the fly might be better for security and/or performance reasons. > The client should just use a surface id (handed out by the memory allocator) > instead of a real address. The kernel would then check if the client is > allowed to use those surfaces and replace the ids with real addresses. The > kernel should also check the buffers for other dangerous stuff. Seconded. I wonder if we can reasonably get there in a backwards compatible way... -- 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 the new InstallShield X. >From Windows to Linux, servers to mobile, InstallShield X is the one installation-authoring solution that does it all. Learn more and evaluate today! http://www.installshield.com/Dev2Dev/0504 -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
