Re: New proposed DRM interface design

[Jon Smirl]

I might move stuff like AGP support into the core. The core is the most
OS specific piece of code. So anything that is very specific to the
kernel API should be in it.

I would split like this:
drm_core - OS specific code, all global things
drm_library - shared code, not OS specific
driver

Then drm_core would always be bundled with the OS.

Is there any real advantage to spliting core/library and creating three
interface compatibily problems?

Stuff like this should probably be an inline...
#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE <= 0x020402
                        up( &current->mm->mmap_sem );
#else
                        up_write( &current->mm->mmap_sem );
#endif

What about the VM page fault routines with 2.4 vs 2.6 differences?
How about HAS_WORKQUEUE?


=====
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxx


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/