Alan Hourihane wrote:
Well, I've done this for 2.5.51, and the short answer is: there's not a lot of difference.On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 02:34:23 +0000, Keith Whitwell wrote:Dave Jones wrote:Yes. What Linus does is above and beyond what we could/should reasonably expect. Asking him to do more isn't an option.On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 02:09:18PM +0000, Alan Hourihane wrote:Some apps only run smooth with 2.5.49+ kernels due to Linus latestwork. > > Nothing of it in XFree or DRI, yet.Linus should submit it here for inclusion - simple. I doubt any of us are tracking 2.5.x that closely at the moment.I'm surprised Linus finds the time to do the DRI merges he does already. Pushing stuff back to DRI-devel is going to take up even more of his time, so this should ideally be done by someone else, preferably someone who really understands the code.
It's either that, or the person who sent Linus the patch should submit it here. I think the latter is far more difficult. Otherwise we (as in someone on the DRI lists - not necessarily a committer to the project) are going to have to track the 2.5.x series and 2.4.x series for stable and development DRM modules now.
There's been a port of the DMA_IRQ_BH mechanism from tq_struct's to work_struct's. This is a 2.5-only change for a start (no work_struct's in 2.4, it seems), and additionally only affects the gamma driver (which should be binned if nobody takes it up -- it's been a year, I think).
There are some janatorial fixes - one to an #if 0'd region, one to the sis driver (which really must be binned!) and one to the i810, which is valid.
And that's it...
Maybe there's more in 2.4.20?
Keith
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:
With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility Learn to use your power at OSDN's High Performance Computing Channel
http://hpc.devchannel.org/
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
