|
From: Antonino D. <ad...@po...> - 2003-03-17 13:05:34
|
On Mon, 2003-03-17 at 20:18, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On 17 Mar 2003, Antonino Daplas wrote: > > On Mon, 2003-03-17 at 18:40, Petr Vandrovec wrote: > > > On 17 Mar 03 at 11:31, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > On 17 Mar 2003, Antonino Daplas wrote: > > > > > As Geert said, it's not just trivial, but logical to split fb_imageblit > > > > > into two. > > > > > > > > So, are we gonna split it? This will also make hardware acceleration support > > > > more clean. E.g. most sbus drivers do color expansion in hardware, and fall > > > > back to cfb_imageblit() for the logo. > > > > It's up to James, though I vote for it. And I don't think any driver > > has accelerated versions of fb_imageblit for the logo, since any > > performance gained is probably minimal and it will involve too much work > > for something that's going to be done only once. > > Wait until someone wants 256-color fonts ;-) When we do get that to that point, the entire interface will be revamped. Imagine passing 128 bytes to draw a single character. This is where Tile Blitting comes in. Tony |