[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090905161645.74a49a84@bike.lwn.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2009 16:16:45 -0600
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: Florian Tobias Schandinat <FlorianSchandinat@....de>
Cc: linux-fbdev-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
JosephChan@....com.tw, ScottFang@...tech.com.cn,
Florian Tobias Schandinat <FlorianSchandinat@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] viafb: 2D engine rewrite (and viafb patches in
general)
On Fri, 4 Sep 2009 20:43:52 +0000
Florian Tobias Schandinat <FlorianSchandinat@....de> wrote:
> This patch is a completly rewritten 2D engine. The engine is no longer
> in a default state but reinitialized every time to allow usage for both
> framebuffers regardless of their settings.
> The whole engine handling is concentrated in a big function which takes
> 16 parameters.
Ouch, that's a lot of parameters. Might it be better to create a
structure to encapsulate all of those drawing parameters?
On a more general level: is anybody maintaining a tree for patches to
the viafb driver? I'm going to be doing some work here (writing a
driver for the video capture engine), and there's patches sitting in
Harald's tree and the OLPC tree. It seems like a central merge point
might be a nice thing to have.
I'd be happy to run such a tree. I'm really *not* qualified to be
passing judgment on patches to the framebuffer driver at this point,
though, so I'm not sure that I'm the best person for the job.
jon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists