Re: New proposed DRM interface design

Keith Whitwell
2004-09-04T17:45:55Z

Jon Smirl wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:52:35 +0100, Keith Whitwell
> <keith@tungstengraphics.com> wrote:
>
>>Currently we have to perform two merges and three releases to get a driver to
>>a users:
>>
>> Merge DRM CVS --> LK
>> Release stable kernel --> Picked up by vendor
>> Release stable Mesa 3D
>> Merge Mesa 3D --> X.org
>> Release stable X.org --> Picked up by vendor
>>
>
>
> X on GL will make this process faster
>
> Merge DRM CVS --> LK
> Release stable kernel --> Picked up by vendor
> Release stable Mesa 3D --> Picked up by vendor
> Release stable X.org --> Picked up by vendor
>
> If DRM went into a kernel development model....
>
> Release stable kernel --> Picked up by vendor
> Release stable Mesa 3D --> Picked up by vendor
> Release stable X.org --> Picked up by vendor
>
> This is the fastest model. Merges have been eliminated.

Yep. Right now, I think it's really the Mesa/Xorg side that needs work and is
the "critical path". If we can convince/educate the distros to take 3D
drivers from Mesa, that will be a good step in the right direction.

>
> You may think that X on GL (gnuLonghorn) is a crazy idea. But
> comptetive pressures from the Mac and Longhhorn will force us into
> doing it so or later. I'd rather do it sooner.
>

Not a crazy idea at all, plus I like the name. But a fork could help relieve
the tension between trying to maintain a stable DRM and the sorts of stuff
that you need to do to move to the next level. And I recognize that I get
grumpy when it sounds like existing functionality is threatened by your desire
to push off in a certain technical direction. If gnuLonghorn/DRM makes a
friendly/development fork off the existing DRM, things might go a little smoother.

Keith