Re: OpenGL-based framebuffer concepts

["Ville Syrjälä" <syrjala@sci.fi>]

On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 04:19:55PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >>> Without specifying a design here are a few requirements I would have:
> >>>
> >>> 1) The kernel subsystem should be agnostic of the display server. The
> >>> solution should not be X specific. Any display system should be able
> >>> to use it, SDL, Y Windows, Fresco, etc...
> >>
> >> of course, but that doesn't mean it can't re-use X's code, they are
> >> the best drivers we have. you forget everytime that the kernel fbdev
> >> drivers aren't even close, I mean not by a long long way apart from
> >> maybe radeon.
> >
> >matroxfb is clearly better than the X driver. atyfb too IMO.
> 
> Okay maybe matroxfb, but if atyfb is the mach64, it really isn't as
> good, the last few times I tried it,

When was that exactly, and what kernel? I've been using atyfb+DirectFB 
exclusively for a few years with chips ranging from VT2 to Rage 
Mobility.

> it just made my LCD bloom, X
> worked,

The X driver probably doesn't touch as much of the hardware as atyfb.

> mach64 is probably the most complex thing as there must be at
> least 15 variations on the theme.... mach64 isn't a chip family so
> much as a chip tribe... I've since burned my mach64 as a sacrifice....

If you ignore the pre-CT chps it isn't too bad.

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
syrjala@sci.fi
http://www.sci.fi/~syrjala/