Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] On i810/i815 fb issues

[tea a. <th...@ag...>]

Thanks Matthew for your statement!

First I have to correct a link I yesterday sent. This should work now:

http://www.visuelle-maschinen.de/ctfb/i810/i810fb_XFree_Issue

It contains answers to this problem given by Jeff Hartmann, Sottek, Matthew J 
and Anda MuniReddy.

The main issue from my point of view was mentioned by Anda MuniReddy:

"Agpgart doesn't have a interface so that any driver can ask for X amount of 
graphics memory. It assumes that only one client is using and he knows where 
he binded the memory."

From my point of view we need to solve that. All other thinks are just 
workarounds. 

I use XF86_FBDev on top of i810fb as a temporary solution.

By the way: i810fb seems to have a problem with 8 bpp. I guess it is caused 
by wrong values in the first 16 colors in cmap in that mode.

Thomas

Am Tuesday 10 July 2001 03:03, schrieb Sottek, Matthew J: / On Tuesday 10 
July 2001 03:03, Sottek, Matthew J wrote:
> I've read over some of the discussion of the i810/i815
> framebuffer discussion, and given the code a cursory look. I
> currently work for an embedded development group at Intel
> and I've been doing X work for quite a while on these
> chipsets, so I thought I would jump into the conversation.
>
> First, looking at the code it seems the main reason this
> fb driver hasn't received more support is due to the
> competition between X and the fb driver for the gart
> resources. Why don't we just make a version of this driver
> that makes use of stolen memory only (1MB) and does not use
> the ringbuffer. This would give us all modes under 1MB in
> size (10x7 at 8bit, 8x6 at 16bit) which is the way the
> chipset is supported in all non AGP environments. (OS2, Dos
> etc.) This would remove all competition between X and the
> fb driver for resources...makes everyone's life easier.
>
> The major need for a framebuffer driver that my customers have
> is for graphical booting, and very basic embedded output like
> near-static displays. Almost all embedded devices that need
> acceleration are doing so via X and only need the framebuffer
> during bootup.
>
> Other applications that wish to allocate a ringbuffer and
> a larger framebuffer could do so with a (not default) option
> such that the vast majority of users can have their boot
> penguin and X too.  I think we could even get blits working
> without the ringbuffer by programming the part directly, but
> that has limited use anyway.
>
>  I don't want to discourage use of the acceleration for the
> devices that may need it, but I don't really want to see
> lots of problems arise from people trying to use fbdev and
> X at the same time to no avail.
>
> please cc me on replies,
> -Matt
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-fbdev-devel mailing list
> Lin...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-fbdev-devel