From: Michel <mi...@da...> - 2005-03-14 22:13:54
|
On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 08:52 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 11:20 -0500, Michel D=C3=A4nzer wrote: > > On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 18:12 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 23:28 -0500, Michel D=C3=A4nzer wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 17:43 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > >=20 > > > > > And finally, I want to blank the screen (using the accel engine) = before > > > > > setting the new mode, so that we come out "clean" of the mode set= ting > > > > > (without ugly artifact), and I will probably clean both fb's (sim= pler). > > > >=20 > > > > That would break X with UseFBDev. > > >=20 > > > How so ? > >=20 > > X assumes that the framebuffer (as in video RAM) contents are preserved > > on mode switches. >=20 > Which I consider bogus :) Oh well... does it do a lot of other crappy > assumptions like that ? What if I just can't allocate it and decide to > put it elsewhere in vram ? (unlikely with my current scheme but > possible). X needs to be fixed. Be that as it may, it remains a fact that such a change would break existing installations... I think that mode setting and memory allocation should be separated. X will always reserve enough video RAM for the largest resolution it uses for the screen contents. --=20 Earthling Michel D=C3=A4nzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI develop= er Libre software enthusiast | http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=3Ddaenzer |