On 29 March 2016 at 14:13, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 28 March 2016 at 23:13, Heiko Stübner <heiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> I have the feeling we're going quite a bit off-topic right now :-) . >> The binary-driver-crazyness, hasn't really anything to do with Yakir's support >> for the RGA (which is about raster-graphics-acceleration, so 2d stuff). >> >> And me mentioning the armsoc-ddx was merely a means to allow some sort of >> different userspace user, as requested in your original mail ;-) . >> > Seems like I forgot to state the obvious - for all the reasons > mentioned, the armsoc ddx seems like a bad example. > >> Maybe you know a better use-case on where to demonstrate the viability of the >> userspace API for it as originally requested. > I'm afraid that my RockChip-foo is extremely limited. Perhaps the > actual user of these should be mentioned ? xf86-video-rockhip (is > there one ?) or any other effort/project that lacks some (all?) of the > criticism listed. > > (Sort of) the bottom line - either reuse the existing interfaces or > provide an approved, full blown userspace (libdrm demos/programs do > not count) that uses the new interfaces. > > I haven't made these rules, just a fool^Wguy that repeats them so that > people don't abuse them much. If in doubt check with Dave and Daniel V > - they had enough repeating these. > I can see how my earlier response may have been come across/interpreted as aggressive and/or demanding. Apologies anyone got upset/annoyed. Let me try in another light - if you guys are willing to have xf86-video-rockchip or keep track of/co-maintain armsoc, pretty much everyone will be over the moon. Personally I'd opt for the former, taking the modesetting (the one in the xserver tree) as a base - it has all the cool new bits ;-) Regards, Emil -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
