Re: SUMMARY: GGI/X : the other way??

Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Sun, 5 Apr 1998 20:23:40 +0100 (BST)


> IIRC, DGA requires root access on the part of the client (the X server
> simply gives the DGA client an offset into /dev/mem, and the client is
> responsible for actually mmapping it), since it needs to mmap /dev/mem to
> get at the framebuffer ... from there, we get back to mostly the same
> problems as in SVGALib.

Thats simply an implementation flaw with DGA not a design flaw.

> Yeah, pretty much, although IIRC, DGA apps really don't have any good way to
> access acceleration at all anyway.

Yes. That is a -big- issue.

> > For example, fbcon doesn't deal with mouse issues (focus, ...). fbcon is
> > Fa mechanism for stuffing pixels onto the screen.
> Yep. fbcon does basically what KGI does, although it doesn't support
> accelleration, nor a modular driver architecture. (to my knowledge -- I need
> to take a better look at it). Anyway, fbcon drivers could probably become
> KGI drivers extremely easily.

fbcon is modular if it needs to be, and it deals with accelerations it needs
to know about in text mode and exposes the other stuff to the X server. It
deals with the mode changes too.

Alan

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu