Re: Xfree86-4.0.1, Lombard, Mach64 driver, X-server Crash

On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Takashi Oe wrote:

On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

In 2.5.x, we'll have a user-defined xor mask for the cursor as the 17th entry
in the dispsw_data array.

Can we put it for 2.4?  As far as I can see, the actual size of
dispsw_data matters only between fb driver and fbcon-cfbxx.c, and the
changes required for each driver seem to be rather small.  Besides,
controlfb is not the only one which will benefit from this change.

That's true. Personally, I see no problems with it if someone's willing to
write the patch for _all_ drivers at once. The real 2.4.0 is still a long way
to go, I think, and the impact of the required changes is known quite well.

Good!  I'll work on it.  Only a few allocate memory for dispsw_data
dynamically, the changes should be trivial for most.

quoted

The main thing we need to be careful about is that the xor mask is different
for truecolor and directcolor visuals: truecolor needs an `all ones' mask,
while directcolor needs `15' for each color component (drivers that incorrectly
report a directcolor instead of truecolor visual will easily be identified).

I don't know how it will work out for atyfb, but we'll see...

Atyfb is directcolor. Grep fro VISUAL_ to find out :-)

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
							    -- Linus Torvalds


** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/