Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 7 Dec 1995 14:52:43 -0600 (CST)
From:      Mark Tinguely <tinguely@plains.nodak.edu>
To:        terry@lambert.org
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Matrox Meteor & pal...
Message-ID:  <199512072052.OAA22145@plains.nodak.edu>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>  Out of curiousity, what would really be invovled in running a driver in
>  its own linear address space so that this wasn't a problem?
>  
>  Or must it be physically contiguous?

the card uses DMAs to physical memory, and needs physically contiguous memory
for each field. we interlace the field into one buffer to make a faster
user application use. so packed mode could use two seperate smaller contiguous
buffers and planer YUV could be split into 3 YUV (interlaced but seperate
Y, U, and V buffers) or 6 (non-interlace Y, U, V buffers) contiguous buffers.

In the massive frame capture mode we could go with an array of smaller
contiguous chunks.

I don't think breaking these up is wise because when you look at grabbing at
a high frame rate you want to keep driver and user processing to a minimum.
Besides, there is no guarrentee we can get the smaller chunks contiguous
after several minutes of allocations/free.

--mark.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199512072052.OAA22145>