Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH 2.6.20 1/1] fbdev, mm: hecuba/E-Ink fbdev driver

2007-02-28 Thread James Simmons
> I'm not sure I understand. What the current implementation does is to > use host based framebuffer memory. Apps mmap that memory and draw to > that. Then after the delay, that framebuffer is written to the > device's memory. That's the scenario for hecubafb where the Apollo > controller

Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH 2.6.20 1/1] fbdev, mm: hecuba/E-Ink fbdev driver

2007-02-28 Thread James Simmons
I'm not sure I understand. What the current implementation does is to use host based framebuffer memory. Apps mmap that memory and draw to that. Then after the delay, that framebuffer is written to the device's memory. That's the scenario for hecubafb where the Apollo controller maintains

Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH 2.6.20 1/1] fbdev, mm: hecuba/E-Ink fbdev driver

2007-02-21 Thread Jaya Kumar
On 2/21/07, Antonino A. Daplas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 11:55 -0500, Jaya Kumar wrote: > > You are right. I will need that. I could put that into struct > fb_deferred_io. So drivers would setup like: > Is it also possible to let the drivers do the 'deferred_io'

Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH 2.6.20 1/1] fbdev, mm: hecuba/E-Ink fbdev driver

2007-02-21 Thread Antonino A. Daplas
On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 11:55 -0500, Jaya Kumar wrote: > On 2/20/07, Geert Uytterhoeven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Don't you need a way to specify the maximum deferral time? E.g. a field in > > fb_info. > > > > You are right. I will need that. I could put that into struct > fb_deferred_io. So

Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH 2.6.20 1/1] fbdev, mm: hecuba/E-Ink fbdev driver

2007-02-21 Thread Antonino A. Daplas
On Mon, 2007-02-19 at 23:13 -0500, Jaya Kumar wrote: > On 2/18/07, Paul Mundt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Given that, this would have to be something that's dealt with at the > > subsystem level rather than in individual drivers, hence the desire to > > see something like this more generically

Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH 2.6.20 1/1] fbdev, mm: hecuba/E-Ink fbdev driver

2007-02-21 Thread Antonino A. Daplas
On Mon, 2007-02-19 at 23:13 -0500, Jaya Kumar wrote: On 2/18/07, Paul Mundt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Given that, this would have to be something that's dealt with at the subsystem level rather than in individual drivers, hence the desire to see something like this more generically visible.

Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH 2.6.20 1/1] fbdev, mm: hecuba/E-Ink fbdev driver

2007-02-21 Thread Antonino A. Daplas
On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 11:55 -0500, Jaya Kumar wrote: On 2/20/07, Geert Uytterhoeven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't you need a way to specify the maximum deferral time? E.g. a field in fb_info. You are right. I will need that. I could put that into struct fb_deferred_io. So drivers

Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH 2.6.20 1/1] fbdev, mm: hecuba/E-Ink fbdev driver

2007-02-21 Thread Jaya Kumar
On 2/21/07, Antonino A. Daplas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 11:55 -0500, Jaya Kumar wrote: You are right. I will need that. I could put that into struct fb_deferred_io. So drivers would setup like: Is it also possible to let the drivers do the 'deferred_io' themselves?