It doesn't seem that exotic to want a PCI layer, and wasn't the entire point of libpciaccess to keep PCI code out of the Xserver?
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@ens-lyon.org> wrote: > Dave Airlie, le Wed 20 Jan 2010 06:42:30 +1000, a écrit : >> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Samuel Thibault >> <samuel.thiba...@ens-lyon.org> wrote: >> > This adds support on x86 for OSes that do not have a PCI interface, >> > tinkering >> > with I/O ports, and makes use of it on GNU/Hurd. >> > >> >> Now this might be a dumb question but how to hurd drivers interact >> with the PCI layer, they all just bang on it directly? > > There is no Hurd PCI driver (yet). > > The only PCI code being used is a temporary glue into GNU Mach. > > Yes, an interface between that and userspace should be designed, etc. > But since it's a temporary glue, it's not really worth doing it right > now. Still people would like to already try Xorg. > >> It just seems lazy to add a direct to hw code again in userspace when >> clearly the kernel should be able for it, > > Depends on the kernel. A kernel could very well not deal with PCI at > all and let userspace agree on using a "PCI server", that could for > instance use libpciaccess. > >> not that I really mind, I'm just hoping other OSes don't get this >> lazy, which marking this code as generic x86 might make them. > > I understand your concern. I still believe it is more helpful to provide > this in the interim than to let yet another barrier from Xorg support > for exotic kernels. > > Samuel > _______________________________________________ > xorg mailing list > xorg@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg > -- Only fools are easily impressed by what is only barely beyond their reach. ~ Unknown Corbin Simpson <mostawesomed...@gmail.com> _______________________________________________ xorg mailing list xorg@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
