Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 19 Feb 2002 23:17:14 -0300 (BRT) | From | Jean Paul Sartre <> | Subject | Re: sis_malloc / sis_free |
| |
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Christoph Pittracher wrote:
> Hello!
> Yes, the sisfb/drm code has some design lacks. > Another lack is the necessary memory offset between framebuffer/drm and > the X driver (see http://www.webit.at/~twinny/linuxsis630.shtml for > details).
Oh, okay. Should that memory offset be a source of processor time waste for allocating memory when switching through FB and X, for an example? If so, sharing the code (instead of duplicating it) is the ideal approach.
> I don't think that it would be a problem to duplicate the code. the > sis_malloc / sis_free functions seems quite stable. I don't think that > there will be big updates for this code.
Hmm, but as you stated, I do not think code duplication should be the best approach.
> Thomas Winischhofer <tw@webit.com> is working on that SiS stuff for > about 2 months. I think it would be best if you contact him and ask > what he thinks about that. I know that he said it would be a good idea > to seperate the sisfb and sis_drm code but he doesn't have enough time > to do it...
If I have such time, I'll contact him. But for the moment, if the code does not compile (still with 2.4.18-rc2-ac1) I'll duplicate the code to get it working until a better solution raises.
Regards, Cesar Suga <sartre@linuxbr.com>
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |