modular: Changes to 'master'

[Daniel Stone]

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 06:36:49PM +0200, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
> [snip ad-hominem; I'm allegedly rubbish]
> 
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 05:16:18PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 06:00:44PM +0200, Erik Andrén wrote:
> > > Could someone enlighten me why there are two radeon drivers in the first place?
> > 
> > Originally, the key differentiator was the lack of ATOMBIOS support in
> > radeonhd.  Then radeonhd had ATOM support forced into it.
> 
> For newer hardware only. Note also that no register level information 
> has been made available for such hardware.

So what you're saying is that it's the exact same as -radeon for newer
hardware.  For older hardware, the details of how it achieves the same
end result differ.

> > It's got its
> > own internal infrastructure that isn't RandR 1.2 because RandR 1.2 sucks
> > and will kill us all, or something, but the only thing it has mapped on
> > to it is ... RandR 1.2.
> 
> Yeah, hrm... modern hw really maps to randr 1.2... DCE 3.2 is fun.

The last time we had this discussion, you hadn't actually looked at
RandR 1.2, but had already decided it was crap.  Have you looked at it
this time? Have you any plans to create anything better than RandR 1.2,
or is this abstraction layer exactly that -- another abstraction layer?

> > It now has EXA, DRI and Xv code copy and pasted
> > from Radeon.
> 
> Try again.

Please correct me if I'm wrong?

> > There is the CS (command submission) infrastructure, so if you
> > desperately want 3D support without a DRM, radeonhd is the market leader.
> 
> You clearly haven't been watching this code at all. 

Please correct me if I'm wrong?

> > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 06:15:58PM +0200, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
> > > Is there a single technical reason why shipping both is a problem?
> > 
> > If you're asking whether or not annarchy will blow up if we ship both,
> > whether or not the server will explode in the face of two drivers with
> > an identical prefix, etc, then the answer is no.  But I don't think
> > that's what you were trying to ask.
> 
> So what stops it from being shipped as well?
> 
> Nothing. Just you.

> > But I don't think that's what you were trying to ask.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20081021/789def24/attachment.pgp>