On Wednesday, August 22, 2007 6:47:31 am Matthias Hopf wrote: > On Aug 20, 07 15:45:00 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-08-20 at 17:27 +0200, Matthias Hopf wrote: > > > Because we won't get an ix86 emulator in kernel space, Linus and others > > > have been pretty clear about that. Graphics hardware sometimes needs > > > BIOS calls, on non-i386 hardware that has to be done by an emulator. > > > > Post-boot, for the primary card, I don't know what hardware requires > > BIOS calls at ths point. We certainly shouldn't encourage people to > > build drivers that do. > > No. But you already limit yourself to the primary card, a new design > shouldn't be limited that way. And an astonishingly big number of people > have to rely on vesa fb, because driver development for their hardware > sucks big time (no docs, no hardware in time, etc.). Currently AFAIK we > don't allow changing the resolution here during runtime, I'd like to see > a new framework being flexible enough with this respect.
Well, you'll still be able to run current code, hopefully that's flexible enough. If there's no native driver available, I don't really see how any of the new features can be reasonably provided (e.g. memory management, kernel suspend/resume support, native modesetting in the kernel). OTOH, I don't think we want to break tools like vbetool or prevent basic VESA drivers from working, it's just that users won't get anything new from them... Jesse ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
