From: James S. <jsi...@in...> - 2002-12-11 14:24:13
|
> I've always stated that the whole fbdev model was flawed, it makes > basic assumptions about how a video card's memory and registers are > accessed (ie. the programming model) and many popular cards absolutely > do not fit into that model. I agree that the design of the /dev/fbX interface is not the best. Unfortunely we are stuck with it. Changing it would break userland apps. > > I will have to go threw the X code to fix that :-( > > There is nothing to fix. You simply must restore the video state when > the last mmap() client goes away. The __sparc__ code does exactly that. I should of worded that better. Meaning I have to see what X is doing so the fbdev driver sets the state itself better. Hm. I'm thinking about the mmap approach versus the fb_open approach being used now. > I think relying on an application that mmap's a card to perfectly > restore the state would work in a perfect world, one we do not live > in. Furthermore, fixing up the state like I am suggesting makes life > much simpler for people actually working on things like X servers and > other programs directly programming the ATI chip. :-( True. We should always assume X or any userland app could be broken. |