On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 11:10:53AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Kirill Smelkov <kirr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 01:08:14AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > > > >> > You're right, of course -- UMS is a huge wart on the kernel driver at > >> > this point, keeping it working while also adding new functionality > >> > continues to cause challenges. We tend to expect that most people will > >> > run reasonably contemporaneous kernel and user space code, and so three > >> > years after the switch, it continues to surprise us when someone > >> > actually tries UMS. > >> > >> We are planning upgrade to KMS too. The kernel is upgraded more often > >> compared to userspace, because of already mentioned (thanks!) "no > >> regression" rule. Userspace is more complex and more work in my context, > >> so it is lagging, but eventually we'll get there. > > > > Also wanted to say, that if whole X could be built, like the kernel, from one > > repo without multirepo-setup tool, with 100% reliable working > > incremental rebuild, etc... it would be a bit easier to upgrade X too. > > > > Sorry for being a bit offtopic, could not resist. I was keeping that > > though in my head for ~ 2 years already, and now had a chance to mention it. > > You don't have to rebuild all of X to use KMS. In most cases, you > just need to update the ddx for your card. I meant the rebuilt not to use KMS, but general case. To me the kernel has one of the great advantage of being lots of self-consistent code because of being maintained in one repo + good build system + good development process. And as the result it is (relatively) easy to upgrade. Anyway, this is just a note from both kernel and X stranger, so whatever... Kirill _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
