Re: Re: FB model basic issues (WAS: radeon, apertures & memory mapping)

["Antonino A. Daplas" <adaplas@hotpop.com>]

On Tuesday 15 March 2005 21:36, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 09:51:40AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Ville [iso-8859-1] Syrj??wrote:
> > > If radeonfb will allocate the buffer for the second head from the top
> > > of the memory users would basically have to guess it's location.
> > > matroxfb simply cuts the memory in two pieces and allocates the buffers
> > > from the start of each piece. I don't really like that approach. Adding
> > > a simple byte_offset field to fb_var_screeninfo would solve the problem
> > > quite nicely but I don't know if such API changes are acceptable at
> > > this stage.
> >
> > You wouldn't have to guess its location, look at fix.smem_start.
>
> But how would someone mmap() the whole memory then? matroxfb already plays

This is multi-head, right?  That implies one fb per head.  So,  can't you do
separate mmaps?  fb0->fix.smem_start|len and fb1->fix.smem_start|len.

Tony




-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_ide95&alloc_id\x14396&op=click