Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268005AbUI1Q47 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:56:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268004AbUI1Q46 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:56:58 -0400 Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.133]:14220 "EHLO e35.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268005AbUI1Q4x (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:56:53 -0400 Message-ID: <415997C6.1060802@us.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:56:38 -0700 From: Ian Romanick User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jon Smirl CC: dri-devel , Xserver development , lkml Subject: Re: New DRM driver model - gets rid of DRM() macros! References: <9e4733910409280854651581e2@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9e4733910409280854651581e2@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2646 Lines: 58 Jon Smirl wrote: I /should/ be able to look at the code changes sometime this week. In the mean time, here are some initial comments... > What are everyone's thoughts on this? There is no technical reason it > can't be implemented on Linux 2.4/BSD, although I don't see any reason > to do it for 2.4. I'm of two minds about this. On the one hand, I agree with you. 2.4 is in maintainence mode, and making a big change like this to the graphics driver system is outside that scope. On the other hand, if the 2.4 and the 2.6 code bases diverge too much, bugs fixed on the 2.6 side are less likely to be fixed on the 2.4 side. Moreover, with more divergence between the two, each gets less coverage. I could really go either way on it. > Any ideas on how to generate a unique identifier for the core? It > probably should be regenerated by the Makefile whenever the core > changes. Personalities would have to match the core identifier. This > would stop people from loading binary modules that don't match the > core. I guess we'd want something like 'drm_core_version_'. Each layered driver would just have to reference the matching symbol. One neat thing about doing this is that we could theoretically make core modules that support multiple versions of the interal API and export a drm_core_version_* symbol for each. I have only one problem with this type of setup. If the user has a version mismatch, it's not trivially obvious why they aren't getting direct rendering. There are already a number of ways a user can get "stuck" like this, and this adds another one. It's not a new problem, but it is one that needs to be addressed. > After sometime testing and fixing obvious problems I'll generate a > patch for the 2.6 kernel and lkml. > > [root@smirl linux-2.6]# lsmod | more > Module Size Used by > tdfx 2816 0 > sis 10176 0 > mga 56704 0 > i915 16896 0 > via 19428 0 > savage 3840 0 > r128 44672 0 > radeon 70272 0 > drm 59684 8 tdfx,sis,mga,i915,via,savage,r128,radeon Anyone have a PCI card so that we can test actually using more than one at a time? In the mean time, I think just having them all load at once and one of them work is good enough. - 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/