Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DRM Patches For Linux 2.6.27 Kernel

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DRM Patches For Linux 2.6.27 Kernel

    Phoronix: DRM Patches For Linux 2.6.27 Kernel

    The Linux 2.6.26 kernel had featured updated Intel and ATI DRM that added the needed kernel support for the ATI R500 and Intel GMA 4500 3D support. While the merge window for the Linux 2.6.27 kernel has already closed, we will hopefully see a few more Direct Rendering Manager (DRM) patches...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NjY3MQ

  • #2
    Is DRM specific to each card GPU, or does the DRM not need to be updated for future GPU?

    Another way to ask the same =) Does the DRM contain GPU specific code?

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes, a good chunk of the DRM is GPU-specific and the proportion of GPU-specific code is growing as memory management and kernel modesetting are added. Dave Airlie recently re-organized the DRM source code to make it more like a typical kernel driver and to make the GPU-specific portions of the code easier to find and manage.

      If you think of DRM as "the kernel driver for graphics" that will give you a pretty good understanding -- with the added complication that most of the same DRM code is also used with FreeBSD, Solaris and other OSes.

      Comment


      • #4
        So that was what his huge patch was about =)

        Does this mean, that AMD will spilt future specifications up in a DRM spec, 2D, 3D, and ISA spec?

        Or can it not be divided like that?

        Thanks for the DRM ~ "the kernel driver for graphics" =)

        Comment


        • #5
          Linus Torvalds to David Airlie:

          Originally posted by Linus
          Quite frankly, I'm not going to take this.

          None of what you describe sounds like regressions, and this is just TOO F*CKING LATE to take big changes like this, to a fragile subsystem that has historically easily introduced new regressions.

          Can you please make a branch with ONLY REGRESSIONS, or fixes for major problems that don't introduce several thousand lines of new code?

          Because you seem to be constantly unable to understand what "merge window" means. And I'm not going to take this kind of crap.

          Linus
          Michael Larabel
          http://www.michaellarabel.com/

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Michael View Post
            Linus Torvalds to David Airlie:
            Hmm, I ve seen Linus being jumpy like that before. Maybe he should do some anger managment or sing "Im so pretty" when the steam goes up.

            Comment


            • #7
              or maybe do like this guy? =)

              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5zvvDtAfx0

              What did Airlie do? Will he still commit new patches?

              Comment


              • #8
                Linus scares me :'(

                Comment


                • #9
                  Scary and a little mean sounding maybe, but he /is/ right.

                  The thing is, I think the DRM folks wanted to get their code into the next volley of major distros....

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    linus has a point, but sometimes (like this one) he is way too aggressive with expressing his opinion.

                    i'd be pissed if i were airlied, but i would also have to agree with linus. new stuff comes in merge window, after it's closed - it's bugfixing only.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Yeah. I'm supporting Linus on this. David has done late merges like this not a few times.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Linus really needs to be nicer to the poor DRM devs. Sure, I can understand why he rejected the patch, but he could have been more polite about it.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Michael View Post
                          Linus Torvalds to David Airlie:
                          Epic fail.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Linus really needs to be nicer to the poor DRM devs. Sure, I can understand why he rejected the patch, but he could have been more polite about it.
                            Sometimes polite doesn't have enough emphasis to make someone understand.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Louise View Post
                              So that was what his huge patch was about =)

                              Does this mean, that AMD will spilt future specifications up in a DRM spec, 2D, 3D, and ISA spec? Or can it not be divided like that?
                              The natural split from a developer's POV would be something like :

                              - Modesetting (basic memory management, display controllers)

                              - Acceleration (everything else)

                              This is pretty much what we ended up doing for 5xx and 6xx, although :

                              - the modesetting docs (released in 07) were missing some memory controller bits which we supplied separately to the devs

                              - 6xx acceleration was split in two parts in order to take advantage of the R600 shader ISA doc which had been prepared by our Stream Computing folks

                              Going forward we will probably continue to "play it by ear" a bit -- for example the 7xx is close enough to 6xx that we will probably just create a single "delta document" covering all of the differences between 6xx and 7xx rather than splitting into modesetting vs isa vs acceleration.

                              We looked at organizing the documentation around the driver components, however in the current X/DRI architecture there is a fair amount of duplication between the X driver and the DRM driver. That duplication will continue (and maybe even grow for a while) but hopefully will disappear once kernel modesetting becomes the norm. Once that happens the X/DRI graphics stack will be more like the rest of Linux, with kernel drivers doing all the register-banging and usermode drivers passing command buffers down through DRM to implement acceleration APIs.
                              Last edited by bridgman; 08-24-2008, 04:27 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X