| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Some notes on Linux and free driversSome notes on Linux and free driversPosted Apr 20, 2006 3:58 UTC (Thu) by vmlinuz (subscriber, #24)Parent article: Some notes on Linux and free drivers
Surely the issue for a graphics driver isn't the ever-changing kernel interface, since, in general, the kernel doesn't manage graphics drivers? The whole point of DRI/DRM is that the graphics driver runs in the X server, and the kernel just gives it an interface to the card - and it doesn't seem like there's any problem with the kernel side of that interface being open. The modern x.org release process seems pretty stable and under control - it would seem like if a vendor *wanted* to fully participate in that process, as opposed to the occasional bug fixes for old cards which seem to be all they contribute now, it shouldn't be that hard for them to get decent drivers shipped, and 'supported' in the normal x.org way.
From my point of view, I don't feel the need for a lot of the funky features available on modern cards, which are often implemented partially or completely in the driver - all I want is fast, stable GLX, with a side helping of reliability and openness, with good xvideo support for afters...
(Log in to post comments)
Some notes on Linux and free drivers Posted Apr 20, 2006 20:20 UTC (Thu) by bockman (guest, #3650) [Link] The whole point of DRI/DRM is that the graphics driver runs in the X server, and the kernel just gives it an interface to the cardYou're sure about that? Because my understanding is that, on the contrary, the kernel do talks with the graphic card and offers DRI/DRM as an higher-level interface that the X server can use to do its stuff. So the hardware-specific stuff goes in the kernel, not in the X drivers... or not?
|
|
||||||||||||