Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932454AbWE3TvO (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 May 2006 15:51:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932453AbWE3TvO (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 May 2006 15:51:14 -0400 Received: from warden-p.diginsite.com ([208.29.163.248]:23027 "HELO warden.diginsite.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932452AbWE3TvM (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 May 2006 15:51:12 -0400 Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 10:40:20 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lang X-X-Sender: dlang@dlang.diginsite.com To: Jon Smirl cc: Dave Airlie , "D. Hazelton" , Pavel Machek , Alan Cox , Kyle Moffett , Manu Abraham , linux cbon , Helge Hafting , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: OpenGL-based framebuffer concepts In-Reply-To: <9e4733910605281759j2e7bebe1h6e3f2bf1bdc3fc50@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <20060519224056.37429.qmail@web26611.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200605272245.22320.dhazelton@enter.net> <9e4733910605272027o7b59ea5n5d402dabdd7167cb@mail.gmail.com> <200605280112.01639.dhazelton@enter.net> <21d7e9970605281613y3c44095bu116a84a66f5ba1d7@mail.gmail.com> <9e4733910605281759j2e7bebe1h6e3f2bf1bdc3fc50@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1566 Lines: 36 On Sun, 28 May 2006, Jon Smirl wrote: >> b) loading fbdev drivers breaks X in a lot of cases, we need to be a >> bit more careful. > > It is perfectly legal to load an fbdev driver with X today. If it > doesn't work it is a bug in X and should be fixed. > >> c) Lots of distros don't use fbdev drivers, forcing this on them to >> use drm isn't an option. > > Why isn't this an option? Will the distros that insist on continuing > to ship three conflicting video drivers fighting over a single piece > of hardware please stand up and be counted? Distros get new drivers > all the time, why will this be any different? as a long time linux user I tend to not to use the framebuffer, but instead use the standard vga text drivers (with X and sometimes dri/drm). in part this dates back to my early experiances with the framebuffer code when it was first introduced, but I still find that the framebuffer is not as nice to use as the simpler direct access for text modes. and when I start X up it doesn't need a framebuffer, so why suffer with the performance hit of the framebuffer? yes, some hardware requires a framebuffer to display anything, but for most video cards, the hardware scrolling of a pure text mode is better (faster, smoother, less cpu required, etc) then the framebuffer equivalent. David Lang - 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/