-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Terry Hancock wrote: > Hamish Marson wrote: >> Terry Hancock wrote: >>> James Richard Tyrer wrote: >>>>>> With a graphics card that runs the X server, you would >>>>>> offload even more overhead. :-D >>>>> True, but is it worth it? >>>> Don't know for sure. This would be a unique product. Although >>>> I >>>>
[deleted] >> Seems to me you'd want to make the card almost a small computer >> (For flexibility). Say an embedded PPC or something with built-in >> fp, and a coupled GPU. > > Yes, that's my impression, too. > >> Making the X server completely HW (i.e. the X in the FPGA) would >> be pretty expensive by the time you got an FPGA big enough & fast >> enough to run it wouldn't it? Especially since you'd have to >> allow for several years of bloat in the code as you update to get >> the latest X features... > > Ah! I should remember my audience when I speak. ;-) Pedantic to the last I'm afraid... > > When I said "in hardware", I just meant on the daughterboard in the > PC -- I'm sure the X server would be running on a fairly standard > embedded CPU. You'd just have the OGC chipset set up as *its* > display adapter. I wasn't talking about implementing an X server > in an FPGA (that sounds terrifying!). > heh... yeah... Trying to understand verilog well enough to draw a line is bad enough :) > Undoubtedly, you'd be running a small Linux or FreeBSD on the X > server card, and X would run in software on that CPU. > > Of course, you'd want to have a simple pass-through to allow > text-mode display from the main system (this might require some > magic, but the idea is that it would allow you to get to your > system if the X server had a problem. You'd be plugging your > keyboard into the X server, though, so you could catch a special > keystroke or something (maybe find a use for that stupid 'windows' > key ;-) )). > OK. We're on the same wavelength at least. >> Hey! You've re-invented the X-Terminal! NCD would be proud... > > Yeah, it's basically a thin-client built into a standard PC > daughterboard. > > I don't know, it'd probably cost more than it's worth (sorry but > I'm pretty clueless about estimating hardware expense), but it was > an interesting thought! :-) > Hmm... It might not cost more than it's worth though... Consider, it'd be standard, well known hardware, open, so completely understood... No multitude of workarounds required because one card works slghtly differently from another... It could be really useful... Especially if the OGA ASIC can come in at a pretty good price... Hamish. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEmtun/3QXwQQkZYwRAiQVAJ91SpC0tChpYByClrSDLm9kkS9TnwCfZAor ssIZVEExZhxKBdqU10Pk9Hc= =SzXN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
