Nothing about DRI prevents a developer from choosing a different kernel / user split. Based on the size of their kernel modules, I'm pretty sure that both 3dlabs and ATI made a different choice. However, they support Linux only and they aren't distributed with the kernel source. Both of those factors precipitate a different set of technical and practical issues. Because of that, the open-source drivers have the kernel / user split that they have.Actually, I think you're wrong that ATI made a different choice. Their fglrx kernel module is only ~2 times the size of the radeon kernel module, and that includes their own agpgart. If you subtract that you'll end up with something which is only about 1.5 times the radeon kernel module size.
Nvidia OTOH really have a big kernel module, they might have made a different choice, or maybe they integrated some windows device driver emulation code, who knows ;-). They certainly don't follow dri model.
Roland
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click
--
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
