John Martin wrote:
> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>> John Martin wrote:
>>> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "primary-card" is a terrible name -- how about "primary-display"
>>>> instead? (The primary display may be on the motherboard!)
>>>>
>>>> What is the purpose of this, is it for console support?
>>> No. It determines which graphics device on the system should
>>> be used as the default device for X, especially in the case where
>>> there are multiple graphics devices (not displays connected to a
>>> graphics device).
>>
>> I'm assuming that this is only used when no explicit configuration is
>> present?
> Correct. It is not needed when:
>
> 1. There is a single GPU in the system.
>
> or
>
> 2.. There are multiple GPUs, /etc/X11/xorg.conf exists *and*
> the device section for the graphics card has the BusID enumeration.
>
>>
>>>
>>> It is independent of the console as the console may be a non-graphics
>>> device.
>>
>> Okay, thanks for the clarification. I still think "primary-card" is
>> a bad name... although you might argue "primary-display" is also
>> bad. How about "primary-controller" or "primary-display-controller" ?
> I would like to avoid "display" in the name just so we don't confuse
> the implementation for a display connected to a graphics card. I'm
> OK with primary-controller.
>
Okay, it sounds like we have converged then. +1 on this version of the
proposal.
- Garrett
