|
From: Antonino D. <ad...@po...> - 2003-03-05 14:45:27
|
On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 21:43, Sven Luther wrote: > On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 08:46:52PM +0800, Antonino Daplas wrote: > > On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 19:05, Sven Luther wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 04:26:04PM +0800, Antonino Daplas wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I believe it's time to finalize what is needed/not needed for the > > > > framebuffer framework: > > > > > > > > 1. Text mode support? > > > > > > Would this work also on arches which don't traditionnaly do text mode ? > > > Like ppc for example. > > > > Yes, pixel-based drawing is still the default. It's only for drivers > > (matrox and sbus) where it might be needed. > > And do you think there is a chance of standard vgacon working on a ppc > board ? I have a pegasos powerpc/pop based board, and its OF use a x86 > emulator to boot the card into vga textmode. matroxfb is broken on it > last i tried, and radeonfb was not uptodate in the kernel that was > provided, and i there is problems with other fbdevs also, so it > would be nice if it was possible to use vgacon on such hardware, until > the fbdevs are fixed, but it is a bit hard to fix things without a > working console. > > > > > 2. console resizing using fbset (besides stty)? > > > > > > What about dynamic multi-head support ? > > > > > > > 7. Anything else? > > > > > > Well, what is the exact status of mult-head and multi-seat ? It is > > > > If you mean one card with multiple heads, that will need driver-specific > > support. > > I thought that the new API, separating the fbcon layer from the fbdev > drivers would add support for this more easily. I guess it would be easy > for the Appian Jeronimo 2000 board, which has two permedia3 chips, and > thus can be seen as two separate devices. Cards with two ramdacs per > chip, like the G400, the later radeon's and most recent cards would need > driver level support, that is understandable, but is all there for fbcon > to take advantage of it ? What about multi-seat, with two full consoles, > with mouse and keyboard for each ? > This was one of the goals of the Ruby project, but I think it's mostly the input layer that got into the kernel. Fbcon needs to be cleaned up, a lot. It still implements the "current console or foreground console" concept (only one console active at a time). Also, this is more of a job for linuxconsole than fbdev. I may be wrong though. > > It does have one benefit though, the newer code should make it easier to > > add an infrastructure on top of fbdev, such as xinerama-style support. > > But this will be in the future. > > Mmm, I don't know if there is really a point to this, are there really > all that much applications which do xinerama-like things on top of fbdev ? > I rather thought that more higlevel userland apps would be doing this. > like either xfree86 with chip-specific drivers or fbdev drivers, or > directfb or something such. > You're right, xinerama is mainly user-app. Tony |