Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S269864AbUIDJsV (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Sep 2004 05:48:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S269862AbUIDJsU (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Sep 2004 05:48:20 -0400 Received: from imladris.demon.co.uk ([193.237.130.41]:63237 "EHLO phoenix.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S269860AbUIDJrW (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Sep 2004 05:47:22 -0400 Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 10:47:18 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Dave Airlie Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Jon Smirl , dri-devel@lists.sf.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: New proposed DRM interface design Message-ID: <20040904104718.A13362@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Dave Airlie , Jon Smirl , dri-devel@lists.sf.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20040904004424.93643.qmail@web14921.mail.yahoo.com> <20040904102914.B13149@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from airlied@linux.ie on Sat, Sep 04, 2004 at 10:43:39AM +0100 X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by phoenix.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1970 Lines: 41 On Sat, Sep 04, 2004 at 10:43:39AM +0100, Dave Airlie wrote: > > > > Umm, the Linux kernel isn't about minimizing interfaces. We don't link a > > copy of scsi helpers into each scsi driver either, or libata into each sata > > driver. > > true but the DRM isn't only about the Linux kernel, the DRM is a lowlevel > component of a much larger system, of which the DRM just has to reside in > the kernel, And what makes this different? > While I agree the perfcet solution is to introduce another binary > interface, but no-one on the dri-devel list is willing to dedicate most of > their time for the next age answering questions like "well I upgraded my > r200 driver, and my mga stopped working, and the ATI binary driver killed > my dog when I changed something else", Just upgrade all of drm. You don't uopgrade a single drm driver either. Or introduce a DRM_VERSION macro ala KERNEL_VERSION. But best thing is really to keep the mast copy of drm in the latest kernel and let vendors backport if nessecary. > Ian has pointed this out on the > dri-devel list as a major issue and to be honest he is not alone in his > worries, if make the kernel responsible for the registration/de-reg only > then build everything else in the drivers, we don't have to worry about > someone adding a line to the middle of a structure and breaking the > modules from somewhere else.. not many people have two different graphics > cards and I'd rather inconvience them than increase support burden.. I think you need to start to play the kernel game if you want your code in the kernel. I know X has this strange idea of beeing useful mostly to make propritary vendors their life easier, but in kernel lands we thing differently. - 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/