Re: New proposed DRM interface design

Keith Whitwell
2004-09-04T10:23:59Z

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 04, 2004 at 10:45:33AM +0100, Keith Whitwell wrote:
>
>>>Umm, the Linux kernel isn't about minimizing interfaces. We don't link a
>>>copy of scsi helpers into each scsi driver either, or libata into each sata
>>>driver.
>>
>>But regular users don't tend to pull down new scsi or ata drivers in the same
>>way that they do graphics drivers. Hence the concern of many drm developers
>>to avoid introducing new failure modes in this process.
>
>
> Actually regulat users do. And they do by pulling an uptodate kernel or
> using a vendor kernel with backports. This model would work for video drivers
> aswell.

Sure, explain to me how I should upgrade my RH-9 system to work on my new i915?

I'm not a big fan of the DRM code either, it's ironic that I'm in a position
where I'm defending it. Thanks to the cleanup work Dave is doing though it is
improving after a long period of neglect.

However, introducing a new binary interface isn't going to magically transform
a fairly neglected codebase into a sparkly new one. All I can really see it
doing is saving a few K of memory in the hetrogenous dual head case. Oh, and
introducing a new failure mode to be debugged at a distance.

Keith