On Thursday 15 September 2011 19:05:00 Alan Cox wrote: > On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 10:50:32 -0500 > Keith Packard wrote: > > On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 18:29:54 +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > > > 1) It's part of DRM, so it doesn't help fb or v4l2 drivers. Except if > > > the plan is to make DRM the core Linux display framework, upon which > > > everything else is built, and fb and v4l2 are changed to use DRM. > > > > I'd like to think we could make DRM the underlying display framework; > > it already exposes an fb interface, and with overlays, a bit more of the > > v4l2 stuff is done as well. Certainly eliminating three copies of mode > > setting infrastructure would be nice... > > V4L2 needs to interface with the DRM anyway. Lots of current hardware > wants things like shared 1080i/p camera buffers with video in order to do > preview on video and the like.
Buffers sharing is a hot topic that has been discussed during Linaro Connect in August 2011. Even though the discussions were aimed at solving ARM-related embedded issues, the solution we're working on is not limited to the ARM platform and will allow applications to pass buffers around between device drivers from different subsystems. > In my semi-perfect world vision fb would be a legacy layer on top of DRM. > DRM would get the silly recovery fail cases fixed, and a kernel console > would be attachable to a GEM object of your choice. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
