On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 12:50 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 20:58:58 +0300, Tiago Vignatti <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Unfortunately no commits here got a review tag. Even so, I'm keeping this > > work > > openly for months already and I'd like to work on it to integrate now. So > > please, tell me your thoughts. > > Deleting this much code is tempting, and I'd like to get it merged for > 1.9, but it will need some level of review and testing from people who > actually use this stuff. > > Ajax -- are you capable of providing some testing/review?
Testing will have to wait a week or so, but sure. Quick review notes: - I'd be inclined to smash all the xserver patches together, I don't think the server will be meaningfully bisectable over that range. - xf86ExtendedInitInt10 might not have been used in any of the drivers, but the Flags arg to VBEExtendedInit _is_ used in (at least) sis, nv, and vesa. I'd prefer not to break vesa with this. - libx86 looks like it still builds with soname of libx86.so.1. That needs to be .2 since you changed ABI, and then the configure check wants to check that it's a sufficiently new libx86. - LRMI_Init in backend-vm86.c maps the legacy ROM for all int10 contexts. That's assuredly not going to work very well. Looks like it does in backend-x86emu.c too. - backend-vm86.c has some pretty spectacular indentation. - The byte order macros really need to work, there are probably devices where byte-reads of a dword register will have the same read side effect as dword-reads. (So, for that matter, the big-endian macros should probably be fixed to swap after reading rather than trying byte accesses.) - backend-x86emu.c looks like it loses the feature of mapping the 1M arena wherever the kernel pleases, and instead reverts to mapping it at the 0 page. This is a security bug on arches where kernel virtual addresses equal user virtual addresses (which includes x86 and amd64). - Nothing appears to set up vga arbitration. Not your fault, X isn't doing that either really. - ajax
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
