On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 03:14:11PM +0000, Keith Whitwell wrote: > Jeff Garzik wrote: > >Thank you for saying it. This is what I have been preaching (quietly) > >for years -- command submission and synchronization (and thus, DMA/irq > >handling) needs to be in the kernel. Everything else can be in > >userspace (excluding hardware enable/enumerate, of course). > > To enable secure direct rendering on current hardware (ie without secure > command submission mechanisms), you need command valididation somewhere. > This could be a layer on top of the minimal dma engine Linus describes.
Certainly. > >Graphics processors are growing more general, too -- moving towards > >generic vector/data processing engines. I bet you'll see an optimal > >model emerge where you have some sort of "JIT" for GPU microcode in > >userspace. > > You mean like the programmable fragment and vertex hardware that has been > in use for a couple of years now? I mean, taking current fragment and vertex processing and making it even _more_ general. Which has already happened, on one particular chip maker's chip... Jeff ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: The SF.net Donation Program. Do you like what SourceForge.net is doing for the Open Source Community? Make a contribution, and help us add new features and functionality. Click here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel