Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2012 14:48:33 -0800 From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg@tristatelogic.com> To: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Subject: Re: r300-based boards... Are they now officially a lost cause? Message-ID: <20100.1352069313@tristatelogic.com> In-Reply-To: <20121104184847.GY66994@over-yonder.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20121104184847.GY66994@over-yonder.net>, "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net> wrote: >On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 10:24:00PM +0100 I heard the voice of >Niclas Zeising, and lo! it spake thus: >> >> As far as I know, this [Gallium3D] API has always been unsupported >> on FreeBSD (this might be completely wrong though), so the chances >> are you are not using it. > >TTBOMK Gallium relies on some slice of the KMS/GEM/TTM in-kernel >stuff, so it _could_ only apply to Intel stuff in FreeBSD, since >everything else is on the UMS stuff X has declared legacy. And I >don't think Intel does any Gallium stuff, so it's irrelevant there >too. So let me see if I understand this... Nowadays, the world (or at any rate, the important part of it, i.e. X.org) thinks that Kernel Mode Switching (KSM) is the Right Way to do this stuff, and that it is preferable to UMS, correct? X.org wants everybody to move to exclusively using KSM (?) FreeBSD has implemented KSM in the kernel, but _only_ for Intel graphics? Gallium requires KSM (?) Nobody has coded any Gallium drivers for any Intel graphics chips (?) (Please excuse me if I say that, as a person who knows nothing really about any of this stuff, it seems to me a most perplexing state of affairs.) Regards, rfg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100.1352069313>