From: Michel <mi...@da...> - 2003-01-31 19:12:24
|
On Fre, 2003-01-31 at 19:35, Antonino Daplas wrote: > On Fri, 2003-01-31 at 19:24, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > > > You don't need X to use the DRM, just some privileged client to > > initialize it. > > You're right. I just realized that since DRM already has an interrupt > handler, it is unwise for fbdev to install its own interrupt handler > too, as this will fatally lock up the machine when DRM and fbdev are > loaded simultaneously. > > So, how about this? Let fbdev have its own vblank ioctl, but for fbdev > drivers with a DRM counterpart, fbdev will just call the DRM > wait_vblank() and send_vbl_signals() functions. Do you think this is > doable, I haven't examined the code thoroughly? > > The main goal is too avoid having 2 independent interrupt handlers for > one device. A noble goal, but the framebuffer device would still need its own code when the DRM isn't active, so I'm afraid there's no way around code duplication, unless we could somehow factor out the common code for the two to share? -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast |