[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1218057777.24714.264.camel@koto.keithp.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 14:22:57 -0700
From: Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>
To: Stephane Marchesin <marchesin@...s.u-strasbg.fr>
Cc: keithp@...thp.com, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
John Stoffel <john@...ffel.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Export shmem_file_setup and shmem_getpage for DRM-GEM
On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 20:09 +0200, Stephane Marchesin wrote:
> Well, this "abstract hardware" is in stores, it's called G80 and R600.
> If intel can't do something on its hardware shouldn't prevent others
> from using it. And I seriously doubt even the current interfaces would
> be fit for this.
Write a driver and we'll talk. Until then, I don't think your argument
is well supported.
If the result is that your driver requires a completely separate
interface than the Intel driver, that's OK too -- we can talk about
merging them together in some unified mechanism at that point.
I'm trying to get from zero to one kernel driver for Intel graphics at
this point; that seems a valuable goal in itself. I hope it leads to
other people building kernel drivers for other graphics hardware. Don't
let me stop you from building a better mousetrap if you think the code
I've written is wrong somewhere.
--
keith.packard@...el.com
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (190 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists