On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 15:09 -0500, Michel Dänzer wrote:On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 10:19 -0500, Alex Deucher wrote:
I think long term though, a better solution would be to get rid of mergedfb and handle each head separately but just change the 2d/3d engines offsets depending on which head you are rendering to. then you wouldn't have to worry about the limits so much (although some of these new super hi-res LCDs would still need some work).
Yep, and as a bonus you'll have to solve basically all of the issues of multi-card Xinerama. If there's a benefit to that (other than making the exotic multi-card Xinerama possible or at least easier), I'm afraid I don't see it. Fixing the remaining MergedFB issues seems much easier and more useful to me.
Hrm... I tend to disagree :) MergedFB is a hack imho. It's much saner in the long run to fix the issues of multi-card Xinerama.
In my view of things MergedFB is a partially implemented solution - until we have framebuffer management code in Jon's DRM driver.
Ideally a graphics card should be able to allocate as many framebuffers as we want (and it can handle) and assign outputs to those framebuffers arbitrarily.
MergedFB implements part of this only..
best
Vladimir Dergachev
Ben.
