Re: [GIT PATCH] more Driver core patches for 2.6.19
- From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 08:46:01 +1100
Btw: there's one driver we _know_ we want to support in user space, and
that's the X kind of direct-rendering thing. So if you can show that this
driver infrastructure actually makes sense as a replacement for the DRI
layer, then _that_ would be a hell of a convincing argument.
And even X is trying to move away from that at least partially... With
the DRI driver handling IRQs and processing command buffers... except
for cards with multiple hardware contexts, but then, we are in a case
similar to Infiniband where the HW is -designed- to have specific areas
mapped into user space, and there is still a kernel driver to arbitrate,
decide who gets what, establish those mappings, etc...
Thus X isn't even a good example :-)
Ben.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- [GIT PATCH] more Driver core patches for 2.6.19
- From: Greg KH
- Re: [GIT PATCH] more Driver core patches for 2.6.19
- From: Linus Torvalds
- Re: [GIT PATCH] more Driver core patches for 2.6.19
- From: Greg KH
- Re: [GIT PATCH] more Driver core patches for 2.6.19
- From: Linus Torvalds
- [GIT PATCH] more Driver core patches for 2.6.19
- Prev by Date: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2.6.19 2/6] support multiple logging agents
- Next by Date: How to interpret PM_TRACE output
- Previous by thread: Re: [GIT PATCH] more Driver core patches for 2.6.19
- Next by thread: Re: [GIT PATCH] more Driver core patches for 2.6.19
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|