From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751312AbWFBRb2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jun 2006 13:31:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751333AbWFBRb2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jun 2006 13:31:28 -0400 Received: from gw01.mail.saunalahti.fi ([195.197.172.115]:34521 "EHLO gw01.mail.saunalahti.fi") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751312AbWFBRb1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jun 2006 13:31:27 -0400 Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 20:31:25 +0300 From: Ville =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= To: Dave Airlie Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: OpenGL-based framebuffer concepts Message-ID: <20060602173125.GA1366@sci.fi> References: <20060519224056.37429.qmail@web26611.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200605302314.25957.dhazelton@enter.net> <9e4733910605302116s5a47f5a3kf0f941980ff17e8@mail.gmail.com> <200605310026.01610.dhazelton@enter.net> <9e4733910605302139t4f10766ap86f78e50ee62f102@mail.gmail.com> <20060601092807.GA7111@localhost.localdomain> <9e4733910606010959o4f11d7cfp2d280c6f2019cccf@mail.gmail.com> <21d7e9970606011815y226ebb86ob42ec0421072cf07@mail.gmail.com> <21d7e9970606012319s292759bbm6c046f09d6bf5826@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <21d7e9970606012319s292759bbm6c046f09d6bf5826@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 04:19:55PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > >>> Without specifying a design here are a few requirements I would have: > >>> > >>> 1) The kernel subsystem should be agnostic of the display server. The > >>> solution should not be X specific. Any display system should be able > >>> to use it, SDL, Y Windows, Fresco, etc... > >> > >> of course, but that doesn't mean it can't re-use X's code, they are > >> the best drivers we have. you forget everytime that the kernel fbdev > >> drivers aren't even close, I mean not by a long long way apart from > >> maybe radeon. > > > >matroxfb is clearly better than the X driver. atyfb too IMO. > > Okay maybe matroxfb, but if atyfb is the mach64, it really isn't as > good, the last few times I tried it, When was that exactly, and what kernel? I've been using atyfb+DirectFB exclusively for a few years with chips ranging from VT2 to Rage Mobility. > it just made my LCD bloom, X > worked, The X driver probably doesn't touch as much of the hardware as atyfb. > mach64 is probably the most complex thing as there must be at > least 15 variations on the theme.... mach64 isn't a chip family so > much as a chip tribe... I've since burned my mach64 as a sacrifice.... If you ignore the pre-CT chps it isn't too bad. -- Ville Syrjälä syrjala@sci.fi http://www.sci.fi/~syrjala/