From: Gareth Hughes <gareth.hughes@acm.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: 4.1.0 DRM (was Re: Linux 2.4.6-ac3)
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:29:47 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3B52438B.3CC6E1BC@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E15Lnrk-00047x-00@the-village.bc.nu>
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> Right but we cannot go around breaking support for older setups. A user
> updating their 2.4.x stable kernel and finding X11 no longer works simply isnt
> an acceptable situation for serious users.
Agreed 100%.
> Why was so much of it macroised rather than turned into library routines ?
Customization is the big one. Some drivers need AGP, some need MTRRs,
some need DMA, some need interrupts etc. With the templates, this is
done with minimal code duplication, and allows the final routines to be
space-efficient -- only the code that each driver actually needs is
present. This is advantageous when building as modules, or building a
single driver into the kernel. You could argue that it's less important
when building many drivers into the kernel, but how many people do that?
Plus, there were symbol clashing problems with building some drivers
into the kernel and some as modules. Keith Owens could comment on
that. The new code avoids this problem as well.
> > ... New drivers are much
> > easier to write as well, which is a nice side-effect.
>
> That I can believe
Pity that no new drivers have been written to prove this...
-- Gareth
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-07-16 1:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-07-14 17:36 Linux 2.4.6-ac3 Alan Cox
2001-07-14 20:01 ` Zilvinas Valinskas
2001-07-14 20:05 ` Alan Cox
2001-07-15 1:45 ` Gareth Hughes
2001-07-15 13:12 ` Alan Cox
2001-07-15 14:01 ` Gareth Hughes
2001-07-15 15:31 ` Alan Cox
2001-07-16 1:29 ` Gareth Hughes [this message]
2001-07-16 1:51 ` 4.1.0 DRM (was Re: Linux 2.4.6-ac3) Keith Owens
2001-07-16 2:07 ` Gareth Hughes
2001-07-16 11:23 ` John Cavan
2001-07-16 11:39 ` Alan Cox
2001-07-16 18:00 ` Jeff Hartmann
2001-07-16 18:12 ` Xavier Bestel
2001-07-16 18:32 ` Jeff Hartmann
2001-07-16 18:42 ` John Cavan
2001-07-16 19:32 ` Jeff Hartmann
2001-07-16 19:34 ` Xavier Bestel
2001-07-16 20:18 ` Jeff Hartmann
2001-07-17 2:37 ` Gareth Hughes
2001-07-17 8:31 ` Mike A. Harris
2001-07-16 19:49 ` John Cavan
2001-07-17 7:19 ` 4.1.0 DRM Mike A. Harris
2001-07-17 5:28 ` 4.1.0 DRM (was Re: Linux 2.4.6-ac3) Juan Quintela
2001-07-18 9:06 ` Gareth Hughes
2001-07-18 16:21 ` Juan Quintela
2001-07-18 13:30 ` Mike A. Harris
2001-07-17 13:19 ` Linux 2.4.6-ac3 Zdenek Kabelac
2001-07-15 1:31 ` Linux 2.4.6-ac3 - some unresolved Eyal Lebedinsky
2001-07-15 13:09 ` Alan Cox
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3B52438B.3CC6E1BC@acm.org \
--to=gareth.hughes@acm.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox