You are describing a transition plan without knowing what the final
design is going to look like. We really need to hash out the final
design so that the right path is taken to get there.
For example I didn't have per CRTC device nodes or user space consoles
in my original design, but after talking to some of the people that
really wanted the multi-seat feature it led me down the user space
console path and to the per CRTC device node solution. I also got beat
up at OLS by people wanting full Unicode support on the console.
No we are defining steps towards improving the drivers on Linux, the
first step is the requirement to fix suspend/resume, and allow
modesetting on multiple crtc/output combinations, the other goals are
not directly within the scope of this work, you can take steps to do
get where we want, but we don't need to move all drivers at once to
get there... we also can't just merge something like that to the
kernel...
Your old ideas were mostly limited by the fact that you didn't get the
crtc/output distinction and persisted with the idea of heads which put
policy in the kernel, this was a major failing you never discovered,
and I didn't probably look enough at the time, since then Keith
Packard has done a lot of work on randr 1.2 to show the path to what
we actually wanted.
Dave.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
