linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] viafb: 2D engine rewrite (and viafb patches in general)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20090905160140.7b36527f.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Sat, 5 Sep 2009 16:01:40 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:	Florian Tobias Schandinat <FlorianSchandinat@....de>,
	linux-fbdev-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, JosephChan@....com.tw,
	ScottFang@...tech.com.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] viafb: 2D engine rewrite (and viafb patches in
 general)

On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 16:16:45 -0600 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> wrote:

> 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?

I was wondering that.  There's less advantage to that than usual
because the call graph is not at all deep.

> On a more general level: is anybody maintaining a tree for patches to
> the viafb driver?

-mm.

>  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.

As far as the rest of the world is concerned, that stuff doesn't exist.

>  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.

Send 'em over.  I haven't heard anything from the original viafb
submitters for a long time.  Hopefully Florian has time to help out
with some review-n-test.

--
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/