> Is the hassle of implementing full-blown, accelerated, concurrent
> access, graphics drivers in kernel worth the effort?
Considering the benifit to X if it happened, it would (overall)
be not only simplification and problem solving, but would add
inherent flexibility to X and any other proggie using the vidcard.
> how many people really need to have several processes
> concurrently writing to the graphics hardware? As it stands i can
> think of only two: X and a direct render graphics layer - which
> would have to co-operate with each other to be of practical use
> anyway.
Look, I'm not going to debate whether I or you or Joe would have need
for this kernel facility, just that it is useful, and simplifies the
job that X (and ALL other possible graphics progs) have to do.
That having been said, please forgive me if I seem ignorant on this
subject, I'm only familiar with the basic points.
> [X is the de facto UNIX graphics standard for the foreseeable
> future, for better of worse. {better imho}.]
X is a little big for just being a way to scribble on a screen and
get accel. I hope you don't disagree here. ;|
> If it was for a single platform with a reasonably limited range
> of graphics hardware - then maybe yes. But for an OS that covers
> so many platforms? and those platforms cover how many weird and
> wonderful different graphics hardware?
Admittedly this is a HUGE problem, but no one is forced to use ANY
video support in ANY kernel. Whatever is supported is supported...
The idea, also, is low-level support, not some high level API. This
simplifies the whole idea.
> And which cards are capable of what? How do you present a uniform
> interface? How would a uniform, rich, in-kernel, 3d & graphics
Ask Jon Taylor. He's like a 3D god or something! Man, reading that
guy's posts... Dude knows what he's talking about.
> implementation run on my P133 with Trident TGUI graphics card?
> Keep it too simple and you're wasting the more exotic hardware.
We're not talking about implementing some high level API in kernel
land like OpenGL. Past what I've just said here, I'm admittedly very
unqualified to comment further on that. See someone like Jon Taylor
for real knowhow.
> This way, we keep a standard and already uniform graphical
> interface, X. And we can write extensions to it to support a
For cripes sake folks, the guy only talks of a driver interface.
The way X works, it has to do kernel space *kinds* of things
in order to work. Noone else thinks this is bad?
-Shawn
<=========== America Held Hostage ===========>
Day 2210 for the poor and the middle class.
Day 2229 for the rich and the dead.
712 days remaining in the Raw Deal.
<============================================>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/