Message-ID: <3EB7DBC0.40907@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 08:58:56 -0700
From: Walt H <waltabbyh@comcast.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030504
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tmb@iki.fi, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.4.21-rc1] vesafb with large memory
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1260
Lines: 27

> There is a problem with this, ...
> If we calculate the exact memory like this, there wont be any
> memory remapped to do double/tripple buffering...
> So the question is: shoud one take the formula and add ' * 2' to
> atleast get the double buffering supported...
> (in the patch I made for mdk, I kept a modified override part so that
> the user can change this, if he needs it....)

Hello.  I realize that there won't be enough memory for double/triple
buffering using my patch. I even thought of doing the *2 thing, but
decided against it. The idea I had is that more and more video cards are
coming out with 128+ MB Ram, and that machines with >=1GB Ram are also
becoming common, especially for gamers etc...  Those users, I believe,
are less likely to use vesafb for anything other than graphics boot
splash and this just removes one little out-of-the-box problem many have
been having. I thought it to be a safer default than attempting to
ioremap the entire framebuffer. Just my thoughts,

-Walt Holman


-
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/