Kernel Summit presentation

Kernel Summit presentation

[Jon Smirl]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1046 bytes --]

I attached the slides from my kernel summit presentation. The major
change is that Linus does not want a new VT state. Instead we should
open a new VT, switch it to VT_GRAPHICS, and then refuse to
acknowledge VT swap requests. Dave Airlie did another presentation on
mode setting and suspend/resume.

The simple overview: goal is to get rid of the current VT swap system
but replace it with something that looks just like it. To do this the
console is split into two halves.

1) kernel console - it is as simple as possible and always guaranteed
to work. It is simpler than current fbconsole. It automatically uses
whatever mode is set on the monitor. There is only one kernel console
- no VTs.

2) user console - implements your normal VTs. Fully accelerated,
supports Unicode, etc.

No one was really against restructuring the consoles. There was
support for a console that always works even when something like X is
running.

I CC'd Dave/Ben. They may have a summary of their talk.

-- 
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: ks.sxi --]
[-- Type: application/vnd.sun.xml.impress, Size: 46659 bytes --]

Re: Kernel Summit presentation

[Alexander E. Patrakov]

Jon Smirl wrote:

> I attached the slides from my kernel summit presentation. The major
> change is that Linus does not want a new VT state. Instead we should
> open a new VT, switch it to VT_GRAPHICS, and then refuse to
> acknowledge VT swap requests. Dave Airlie did another presentation on
> mode setting and suspend/resume.
> 
> The simple overview: goal is to get rid of the current VT swap system
> but replace it with something that looks just like it. To do this the
> console is split into two halves.
> 
> 1) kernel console - it is as simple as possible and always guaranteed
> to work. It is simpler than current fbconsole. It automatically uses
> whatever mode is set on the monitor. There is only one kernel console
> - no VTs.
> 
> 2) user console - implements your normal VTs. Fully accelerated,
> supports Unicode, etc.
> 
> No one was really against restructuring the consoles. There was
> support for a console that always works even when something like X is
> running.

I am really interested in this, and want to help (with code, once 
architectural issues are solved). But there is a question:

How should applications that currently rely upon a kernel VT system being 
present (e.g. Xorg, MPlayer, SDL) be modified? (I mean, is there any proposed 
API for hunting for a free userspace VC?)

-- 
Alexander E. Patrakov


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO September
19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf