The suspend2 discussion resumes [LWN.net]

The suspend2 discussion resumes

Posted Apr 26, 2007 12:12 UTC (Thu) by ortalo (guest, #4654)
Parent article: The suspend2 discussion resumes

Hey, that reminds me: why not put the X server inside the kernel then (maybe it would solve interactive tasks scheduling issues elegantly by the way)?
Ah ah ah!

R.O. -- former anonymous KGI hacker

to post comments

The suspend2 discussion resumes

Posted Apr 26, 2007 14:19 UTC (Thu) by Randakar (guest, #27808) [Link] (2 responses)

You're laughing, but I actually heard some noises about moving the drivers X uses into kernel space - in an interview with Keith Packard, of all people.

Looks like there is a good argument to be made for such a development.

The suspend2 discussion resumes

Posted Apr 26, 2007 15:45 UTC (Thu) by pjones (subscriber, #31722) [Link] (1 responses)

The whole X server? I think not. But there has been serious (and reasonable) talk of moving video mode setting and power management to the kernel. This would help simplify quite a lot of code, and not just in X.

The suspend2 discussion resumes

Posted Apr 26, 2007 16:59 UTC (Thu) by jsbarnes (guest, #4096) [Link]

In fact, it's already working to some extent on Intel hardware. Check out
the modesetting-101 branch of the DRM tree: full kernel modesetting,
video output detection and management, and a DRM based framebuffer console
(and lots of bugs & missing features :).