Re: LCD scaling type

[Antonino Daplas <adaplas@pol.net>]

On Sat, 2003-01-11 at 17:47, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-01-11 at 07:58, Antonino Daplas wrote:
> > On Sat, 2003-01-11 at 03:42, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> 
> > I second to this.  It's useful to have an extra field in
> > fb_var_screeninfo for drivers to play around.  It's like an extension
> > field and its main use is to expose a hardware capability which is
> > uncommon enough to warrant generic support.  It's meaning will vary from
> > driver to driver.  
> 
> I don't fully agree here. While I agree a driver specific field might
> be useful, I beleive the "flags" field should have defined meaning.
> 
> > I also have a couple of things that come to mind (like switching from
> > truecolor to directcolor and vice versa without rebooting).  I currently
> > use var->nonstd which is probably not the the right thing to do.
> 
> For this too, defined flags would make sense as other driver might want
> to implement the same capability, in which case we really want all of
> them to do it the same way.
> 

Well, yes of course, if a particular hardware feature is quite useful
and common, then you need something definitive.  But what I also want is
another field which will serve as a private communication channel
between userspace and driver. Adventurous users/testers can use them to
turn a unique hardware feature on/off.  This is similar to 'Tweak'ing
utilities common in MS Windows.

Tony



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com