Re: [PATCH v2] viafb: 2D engine rewrite (and viafb patches ingeneral)

From: Andrew Morton
Date: Sat Sep 05 2009 - 19:02:33 EST

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

> On Fri, 4 Sep 2009 20:43:52 +0000
> Florian Tobias Schandinat <FlorianSchandinat@xxxxxx> 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?


> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at