On 28 March 2016 at 23:13, Heiko St?bner <heiko at sntech.de> 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. -Emil
