Moving mode setting into the kernel [LWN.net]

Moving mode setting into the kernel

Posted Jan 22, 2007 22:58 UTC (Mon) by drag (guest, #31333)
In reply to: Moving mode setting into the kernel by bronson
Parent article: LCA: Updates on the X Window System

Well the utopian viewpoint in this is that X should have absolutely nothing to do with the hardware.

That their should be a standardized API that the OS should have that will allow X to run well. OSes then are free to impliment that in any manner that they want to.

That is one of the reasons they are targetting OpenGL.

OpenGL is able to provide most of the low-level things that X needs, as well as provide plenty of extra capabilities that will be required by applications now and into the future.

The only major problem with it is that it doesn't have a standard for having ways for a application to control aspects of the display that X needs to have to do things like the RandR stuff.

Assuming that gets sorted out (and it should) then X becoming a pure OpenGL means that it becomes just another application that a OS can handle in any manner that that OS see fits. Usermode drivers, kernelmode drivers, software mesa, etc etc. Whatever works best for that system design.

Right now it's 'You use X's drivers to access harwdare or you won't use X at all'. It's a very non-portable way to be portable, it seems like to me.

to post comments

Moving mode setting into the kernel

Posted Jan 23, 2007 15:23 UTC (Tue) by sylware (guest, #35259) [Link] (1 responses)

As far as I know, there is no randr equivalent model in opengl (even opengl egl).
If they target opengl only, the khronos group (the guys which are now defining opengl) have to improve the opengl APIs in order to include at least the services randr provides.
If the opengl APIs stay out of the randr addressed issues and xorg folks still pushes hard towards opengl, we will end with a xorg server reduced to only opengl/glx and randr.

Moving mode setting into the kernel

Posted Jan 23, 2007 15:37 UTC (Tue) by k8to (guest, #15413) [Link]

Of course remember that the terminal situation you propose (and I agree that could occur) need not be terminal. There could be some folding together at some point afterwards.