Re: Overriding X on panic

["Dave Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>]

On 11/27/06, Alan <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 09:18:41 +0100
> Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > The mode switch sequences for modern cards are a bit more hairy than
> > > lists of I/O poking unfortunately.
> >
> > for the Intel hw Keith doesn't seem to think it's all that much of a
> > problem though...
>
> Including the TV out, odder LCD panels, non BIOS modes etc ? If so then
> it might be an interesting test case for intelfb to grow some kind of
> console helper interface

It's non-trivial, I think you are better off going initially with just
using the current framebuffer that X is using, I know ajax was doing
some hacking on this with a "user"-framebuffer, until I disuaded him
due to I think the trouble caused by dual-head and something else I
can't remember..

I personally think we need to probably just bite the bullet and start
sticking graphics drivers into the kernel, the new randr-1.2 interface
for X is probably a good starting point for a generic mode setting
interface that isn't so X dependent and could replace fbdev with
something more sane wrt dualhead and multiple outputs... fbdev could
be implemented on top of that layer then.. also suspend/resume really
needs this sort of thing....

My main worry with integrating graphics drivers into the kernel is
that when they don't work the user gets no screen, with network/sound
etc this isn't so bad, but if they can't see a screen debugging gets
to be a bit more difficult....

Dave.
-
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/