Stuart Young writes: > At 07:01 PM 6/12/01 +0100, Egbert Eich wrote: > >I've looked at it - you only offer binary drivers. > >However I think I know what you do. Your patch is pretty similar to > >the VESAFbHack patch posted a while ago. > > The VesaFBHack patch, which was my little effort at re-implementing the > patch posted to this list by Kirill Konyagin (back in July 2001), may have > been based on the same work as Rene, or Rene's work was based upon it. I > simply put it into a form that allowed the user to easily enable/disable > it. It also meant that if it was fixed, a config file change was not really > necessary (something I was looking at, as I was investigating rolling these > out into a production environment, and the less changes in the future, the > better).
Right. Your patch was OK. I'm thinking about adding it for 4.2. I doubt that I will be able to implement the BIOS initialization stuff. For the SiS to fully work with int10 I may have to modify some stuff in there code. I won't do that before 4.2 comes out. > > >I'm thinking of something different: sis_bios.c is converted BIOS code > >anyway. Since we have the int10 infrastructure we can use it to > >run the real BIOS and eliminate much of the code in sis_bios.c. > > You might find that a lot of the code in the XFree driver is now the same > as that in the Linux Kernel FrameBuffer for the SiS630 chip, so some common > development here could be a definite advantage. I suggested this a long time ago. The problem was that kernel code was under GPL while ours was under an MIT style license. > > Something I have noticed as a difference between the VesaFB and SiSFB > drivers in the Linux kernel, is that the VesaFB driver does it's init as > absolutely early as it can, as the routines to change resolution have to be > performed (afaik) in real mode, not in protected or virtual modes. > AFAIK there is a way now to change VESA video modes on the fly. > > > I tryed to get docu from sis - even considering signing a NDA - but > > > suddenly the email thread with them stopped ... ? - They so not seem to be > > > interested in getting the chip to work properly under Linux ... > > > >:-( > >I would certainly love to have better docs for the graphics part of > >the 630 than there are in the 630 datasheet. > > I got very little response from SiS, to very similar or the same queries > (re: docs, NDA, sample code, etc). The company I work for wants to use a > machine made by Clevo (a Taiwanese company) as a Point of Sale terminal > (it's a desktop with an LCD screen, and very small footprint), but with the > current problems we have with the SiS630 chipset (if not resolved soon), we > will simply have to turn down the product as another "good idea, bad > implementation". Pity really, as the cost was reasonable, and the options > on the product were ideal for our market. > The problems can be resolved very quickly by using the video BIOS. The problem is we are past feature freeze for the 4.2 and I don't want to make modification to int10 code at this late stage. Int10 is quite touchy. If I get something wrong I'll have to take the blame. Egbert. _______________________________________________ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
