From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Vetter Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:17:19 +0000 Subject: Re: Proposal for a low-level Linux display framework Message-Id: <20110916141719.GD2873@phenom.ffwll.local> List-Id: References: <1316088425.11294.78.camel@lappyti> <1316100594.23214.65.camel@deskari> <1316107275.23214.99.camel@deskari> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Keith Packard Cc: Tomi Valkeinen , linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Archit Taneja , "Clark, Rob" On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 07:55:37PM -0500, Keith Packard wrote: > I suspect helper functions would be a good model to follow, rather than > trying to create a whole new device infrastructure; some of the > communication paths aren't easily separable from the underlying output > devices. This. Helper functions make the driver writers life so much easier - if your hw doesn't quite fit the model, you can usually extend functionality with much less fuzz than if there's a full framework. This is also pretty much the reason, why I don't like ttm. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48