Re: SVGA kernel chipset drivers.

Brad Pepers (pepersb@cuug.ab.ca)
Mon, 3 Jun 1996 13:05:17 -0600 (MDT)


> > Rather then having to support every card natively why not just support
> > VESA standard version 2.0?
>
> Arghh.. thud thud thud
>
> VESA last time I looked was a 16 bit standard
>
> Far more useful. Let Linus rave about X, let the GGI people swear blind they
> have the one true answer, and the people like me who believe bits of GGI (the
> in/out of graphics mode stuff) ought to be kernel space sit and watch. When
> there is real working source code for general use then we can come back to it.
>
> There's no point taking pot shots at different ideas until after we have
> experimental evaluations...

What I have a hard time understanding is why graphics devices are considered
so different from other devices? Why are there mouse, sound card, ...
devices in the kernel but not graphics? What makes these devices special?
The mouse is not an essential device for loading. The X server could as
well directly access it as it does the video. Sound cards are also not
essential.

Why are graphics cards singled out as the only PC hardware that cannot
be in the kernel?

Don't get me wrong - I don't want to see massive drivers included in the
kernel. But some basic support from the kernel for mode switching and
querying of card information along with a user land program that provides
a standard API that uses this information sounds like a good idea to me.

+----------------------------Ren & Stimpy--------------------------------+
| "Psst. Hey Guido. It's all so clear to me now. I'm the keeper of the |
| cheese. And you're the lemon merchant. Get it? And he knows it. That's |
| why he's gonna kill us. So we gotta beat it. Yeah. Before he lets |
| loose the marmosets on us! Don't worry, little missy! I'll save you!" |
+------------------ Brad Pepers -- pepersb@cuug.ab.ca -------------------+