Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: Another New KMS Graphics Driver Tips Up

  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    319

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattst88 View Post
    Poor journalism.

    .

    Dave wrote the AST driver as well. The G200 driver is based on the Matthew Garret's Cirrus KMS driver for QEMU. The Cirrus driver is based on my GLINT KMS driver, so the G200 driver is as well.

    Well its bits of both really.

    I wrote AST, then took the MGA and next cirrus code from mjg based on your code, I then transmuted them and caluclated their load bearing tangents. (Sorry watching peppa pig), I then remodeled the mga/cirrus code to look like my AST code and used the same memory management scheme as my AST code, so all 3 drivers nearly look the same apart from the crtc mode setting and gpu init functions :-)

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,371

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJenbo View Post
    Is there any docs for the desktop cards? Might be fun to try and get the driver working with some of those.
    In addition to the docs, there is the UMS code and matroxfb kernel drivers available for reference.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    100

    Default

    Wow, so in a few years I might be able to dust off my matrox G400 and have KMS for that card?

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    in front of my box :p
    Posts
    794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Wow, the G200 is a 14-year-old graphics card and its seeing new device driver development work in the open source community.
    I wish we could say that for all these chips around... I wonder what that driver actually does and if Matrox ever published enough docs to do more than modesetting. Anyway, havin KMS-drivers is always a good thing.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,633

    Default

    @agd5f

    is it good to copy that much code? maybe combine em into one driver?

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattst88 View Post
    Because you don't care about accelerating an old chip embedded in a server, while you get the benefits of KMS.
    - flicker free boot
    - faster VT switch
    - kernel errors visible if X hangs

    Now, which of these is important in a server?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    - flicker free boot
    - faster VT switch
    - kernel errors visible if X hangs

    Now, which of these is important in a server?
    higher resolution in VNC ? this matters if you drop the network transparency because of Wayland.
    then you can drop the "X" stuff complete!

    for these people don't want use ssh connections ?

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    299

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    - flicker free boot
    - faster VT switch
    - kernel errors visible if X hangs

    Now, which of these is important in a server?
    RH/Fedora actually plans to ship no UMS drivers in the future, so they're writing KMS drivers for the hardware they care about. Without xf86-video-mga (say, if you're not running X), the only other option is matroxfb which doesn't support the G200.

    Also, you can do things like power down the graphics chip during DPMS to save energy. And since it's a server that's not typically attached to a monitor, that's basically always.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    989

    Default

    ZzzzzzzZZzzzzz.... if only RadeonSI got as much love as 14 year old hardware...

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,458

    Default

    I could point out that HD7xxx has had KMS support for a while (ie a whole pile more love already) but I imagine what you really mean is "if only radeonsi got 1000x more love than 14 year old hardware instead of the 100x or so it gets today" so that the high level of functionality expected for the new card could be implemented as quickly as the modesetting-only expectations for 14 year old hardware" ?
    Last edited by bridgman; 04-27-2012 at 07:18 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •