this work looks unbelievable awesome, i hope devs will squeeze all the potential it has to offer.
but why those things still called "CRT Controllers" ? are they even have something to do with CRT monitors these days other then deprecated analogue outputs ? and they do support all kinds of outputs, right ?
Last edited by dfx.; 11-04-2011 at 01:21 PM.
so, as i suspected, this term is obsolete and misleading :(
too bad that with whole not-looking-back approach in OSS this kind of thing isn't updated.
even term "display controller" is wrong since CRTC is a subset of VDC which is more like a "video card before the age of video cards". thing for generating simple analogue video signal without any real processing power.
nowadays, GPU and output logic are completely separated, no ? and the display, like monitor or projector, has its own quite complex hardware for interpreting digital signal.
as i understand, there is no unanimity in naming those parts but i would suggest calling display video input logic as "display controller" and video card output logic as "output controller", especially since there are many different kinds of outputs these days even on a single card, like there can be several RAMDACs for driving S-video/Composite and analogue pins on DVI and TMDS module for generating digital signal in same DVI ports and HDMI.
Last edited by dfx.; 11-05-2011 at 03:08 AM. Reason: graphical smileys must be destroyed!
I GPU is basically a collection if independent engines (display, 3D, video, etc.) tied together by a memory controller. The display hardware works independently of the drawing engine. See my blog post on radeon display hardware:
http://www.botchco.com/agd5f/?p=51
tar is mainly an archiving format and an utility for it. storage for it changed, format didn't.
but output controller on video card not only capable of driving both analogue and digital signals but also doing so at different timing and in different formats of those at the same time. even its analogue part capable of giving signal to much more than just old-ass CRT. everything about it changed. it just different hardware, controlled by much different software and that software should be named accordingly.
so, go and kindly fuck yourself.
which is exactly my point. and this is why i suggest to rename CRTC (in scope of OSS) in a way that it would be clear that it's completely separated from drawing and computing part of the card (as i understand, classical CRTCs where pretty much the main components of unaccelerated graphical hardware) and is capable of providing graphical output in a plethora of ways.