On Tuesday 15 March 2005 21:36, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 09:51:40AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Ville [iso-8859-1] Syrj??wrote: > > > If radeonfb will allocate the buffer for the second head from the top > > > of the memory users would basically have to guess it's location. > > > matroxfb simply cuts the memory in two pieces and allocates the buffers > > > from the start of each piece. I don't really like that approach. Adding > > > a simple byte_offset field to fb_var_screeninfo would solve the problem > > > quite nicely but I don't know if such API changes are acceptable at > > > this stage. > > > > You wouldn't have to guess its location, look at fix.smem_start. > > But how would someone mmap() the whole memory then? matroxfb already plays
This is multi-head, right? That implies one fb per head. So, can't you do separate mmaps? fb0->fix.smem_start|len and fb1->fix.smem_start|len. Tony ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_ide95&alloc_id396&op=click -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
