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
