Re: Some questions

On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 09:33:34AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, James Simmons wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

We should split the monitor programing stuff out from stuff like bpp etc.
Now if you think about it we can do things like change the bpp without 
having to redo the monitor programming. This is the flaw with the old and 
even the new api. 

You could have done that from the beginning. Just look at which fields have
changed and which haven't.

I should of but didn't because I knew driver would take teh path of lest 
resistance to port there drivers. TO much change would have made the 
current situtation much much worst. 

One other reason why this isn't done is because X may interfere with it. If we
don't do a full register update, but change the parts that need a change only,
we will see less flickering (no PLL reprogramming), but we will suffer if X
doesn't restore the registers to the exact same values they were before.

X is supposed to do that, even if it doesn't know anything about fbdevs,
maybe especially if it doesn't know anything about fbdevs. If it knows
about fbdev and uses it, X should not be touching the modes anyway,
right ?

So, we are saving/restoring things twice, one time in X, the other in
the fbdev.

Friendly,

Sven Luther


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The debugger 
for complex code. Debugging C/C++ programs can leave you feeling lost and 
disoriented. TotalView can help you find your way. Available on major UNIX 
and Linux platforms. Try it free. www.etnus.com