Re: ioctl number 0xF3
From: Thomas Winischhofer (thomas_at_winischhofer.net)
Date: 05/22/04
- Previous message: Cybermario: "PROBLEM:"
- In reply to: Francois Romieu: "Re: ioctl number 0xF3"
- Next in thread: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: ioctl number 0xF3"
- Reply: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: ioctl number 0xF3"
- Reply: Francois Romieu: "Re: ioctl number 0xF3"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 17:37:57 +0200 To: Francois Romieu <romieu@fr.zoreil.com>
Francois Romieu wrote:
>He can surely tell when an egg stinks. However Arjan is not a chicken.
I didn't mean that as any sort of insult. I am just tired of the XFree86
people telling me "implement a generic interface". I write one single
driver and want the users of this driver to have some sort of comfort.
Waiting until someone comes up with some generic solution (for a design
of which I don't have time nor the required knowledge about a zillion
different systems) I am old and grey.
> Thomas Winischhofer <thomas@winischhofer.net> :
>>Is 64 out of, what's that, 65536 too much to ask? Well, I could live
>>with 32 as well...
>
> Reserving a generous ioctl range without any clear interface will make
> some people nervous. If you can not specify the interface now, try to
> separate the generic/specific part of it and use sub-ioctl for the really
> scary things as it will make the future life easier.
>
> If you have some pointers to the existing code, that may help too.
Well, before I start implementing it (further), I thought it would be
smart to be able to rely on certain things. As long as I don't even know
if I get the numbers I don't write code... but frankly, the current
development sisfb version available on my website has a very few of the
intended ioctls already implemented.
The interface I intend to use matches the one the X driver has (using
the Xv extension as an ioctl replacement) and will be documented. Since
I develope both the SiS kernel framebuffer driver as well as the SiS X
driver this will reduce duplicate code and ensures good cooperation.
Furthermore, there could be a common library for both the framebuffer and X.
Hm. Were the matrox folks asked for a "clear interface" in advance when
they started using the 'n' ioctls? Am I too polite? ;)
sisfb uses a few ioctls already, as an extension to the generic fb
related ioctls. (Although the version currently in mainline 2.4 is not
in any way 32/64 bit safe, and neiter is the mainline 2.6 version yet as
regards the obviously required ioctl32 emulation stuff - investigating
this at the moment).
Thomas
-- Thomas Winischhofer Vienna/Austria thomas AT winischhofer DOT net http://www.winischhofer.net/ twini AT xfree86 DOT org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Cybermario: "PROBLEM:"
- In reply to: Francois Romieu: "Re: ioctl number 0xF3"
- Next in thread: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: ioctl number 0xF3"
- Reply: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: ioctl number 0xF3"
- Reply: Francois Romieu: "Re: ioctl number 0xF3"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|