Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
>
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, deek wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Vladimir Dergachev scribbled:
> >
> > > <__snipped_>
> > >>
> > >
> > > I've implemented this (easier than software CCE) scheme. If you want to
> > > please try the latest ati.2 CVS code at http://gatos.sf.net - or just
On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, deek wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Vladimir Dergachev scribbled:
> > >
> > > > <__snipped_>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I've implemented this (easier than software CCE) scheme. If you want to
> > > >
On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Daryll Strauss wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 02:05:42PM -0500, Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
> > Regardless of the way it is merged the driver major version will need to
> > be bumped. GATOS drivers does this but only minor - as I did not want to
> > upload a mesa radeon dri
On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Daryll Strauss wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 03:15:53PM -0500, Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
> > I completely agree with you.. but I did not give you details :))
> >
> > What happens is that if you try to use older drm driver with GATOS 2d
> > driver the GATOS driver will no
Daryll Strauss wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 03:15:53PM -0500, Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
> > I completely agree with you.. but I did not give you details :))
> >
> > What happens is that if you try to use older drm driver with GATOS 2d
> > driver the GATOS driver will notice and complain. Bu
> 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
On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Gareth Hughes wrote:
> > 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:
> 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
On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Gareth Hughes wrote:
> > 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
Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
>
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Gareth Hughes wrote:
>
> > > 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, someo
>> 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
I think this discussion is really interesting cause it discuss about the
biggest problem the DRI project has to deal with: compatibility.
The ideas Ian suggested here may fix the problem, but may also create a
big confusion in the driver code. I'm just thinking about what will
happened after mul
On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 09:05:59AM +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
>Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Gareth Hughes wrote:
>>
>> > > The assumption was only made for experimental GATOS drivers. It is a
>> > > practical one. More people come and ask: "I upgraded to GATOS driver an
Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
> As for Linus not wanting to accept it, 2.4 has dropped most nat filters
> except for ftp and most of them aren't back yet. So I don't buy this
> argument.
Vladimir,
This is no joke. We absolutely need compatability. Large amounts of
developer pain don't even begin
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 08:27:49PM -0700, Jens Owen wrote:
| This is no joke. We absolutely need compatability. Large amounts of
| developer pain don't even begin to compare to the enormous number of
| headaches incompatability causes our users.
Not to mention that Linus will almost certainly t
Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
> Also, I can make drm driver work nice with older 2d drivers - as soon as
> someone will show me a way to tell the version of the 2d driver that is
> accessing the drm driver.
How about using a new set of IOCTL numbers for the new interface--then
you'll know whether yo
> 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),
On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Gareth Hughes wrote:
> > 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
> Kevin said:
> - If we want to update the DRM drivers in the Linux kernel to say DRM
> version y', which supports the new XFree86 4.3.0 drivers (DDX version
> x'), then DRM version y' MUST also support the older DDX version x
> drivers as well for backwards compatibility.
Two other points
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 10:43:20PM -0500, Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Jens Owen wrote:
>
> > Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
> >
> > > Also, I can make drm driver work nice with older 2d drivers - as soon as
> > > someone will show me a way to tell the version of the 2d drive
20 matches
Mail list logo
