> On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Dr Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
>
> >
> > On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
> >
> > > In fact, I do not even know a good app to test GL functionality,
> > > not perfomance (i.e that all calls do as they should and do not crash
the
> > > machine).
> >
> > I'm fairly
> I can't believe I am hearing this. The major benifit of free software is
> that if there is a new and better design you can try it out and then
> everyone can upgrade. It's not as if we are charging them money they way
> Microsoft does.
>
> Are you saying that progress stops with the inclusion
> That's too bad because this will imply a _lot_ of hair in the drivers.
That's the way it has to be, for the DRM code to remain in the stock
kernel distro. Linus has make this crystal clear.
> The fact is that we have a driver split several ways: 3 portions from
> XFree tree (2d, 2d and drm),
> Gareth, the current driver is broken. If someone wants to use video
> capture they _need_ both GATOS 2d driver and GATOS drm driver, period.
>
> What's so wrong about upgrading ?
Guaranteed, someone will get a mismatch -- your changes may go back
into the stock kernel, breaking DRI CVS or what
> The assumption was only made for experimental GATOS drivers. It is a
> practical one. More people come and ask: "I upgraded to GATOS driver and
> DRI won't work anymore !" Answer: RTFM, upgrade drm driver.
It's already been determined that:
"I just upgraded my kernel, and DRI won't work anymor
Mike A. Harris wrote:
>
> The i830 DRM driver contains empty for loops used for short
> delays. Modern gcc and other compilers, when used with
> optimization switches will optimize these empty for loops out,
> leaving no delay. In addition, CPU's such as the Pentium 4, will
> needlessly overhea
