Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:47:17 -0400
From:      Coleman Kane <cokane@one.net>
To:        "Jacques A . Vidrine" <n@nectar.com>, Coleman Kane <cokane@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, dfr@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/modules/tdfx Makefile
Message-ID:  <20000626114717.C61686@cokane.yi.org>
In-Reply-To: <20000626070946.A18300@bone.nectar.com>; from n@nectar.com on Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 08:11:26AM -0400
References:  <200006252344.QAA29815@freefall.freebsd.org> <20000626070946.A18300@bone.nectar.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jacques A . Vidrine had the audacity to say:
> 
> Aw heck, I was too slow in reply, but anyway:
> 
>   So we'll have a 3dfx.ko for glide and a tdfx.ko for XF86?  yuk.
> 
> Can we have <prefix>3dfx.ko for each of these instead?  Such as g3dfx.ko
> & x3dfx.ko or even glide-3dfx.ko and dri-3dfx.ko?

Apparently, the tdfx.ko filename cannot be changed as there are internal
dependencies in XFree86 that dictate this. I chose tdfx originally
because you cannot put a number in the device name inside the kernel. I
chose 3dfx now for the modle name because it would be simple to change
that than break Xfree. Basically, since my driver handles operations on
/dev/3dfx, this was the reason for choosing the new name 3dfx.ko.

> Or is the problem that we missed some layering somewhere?
>

Although, I suppose it entirely possible to put my code into the XFree86
source, I highly doubt that would help anyone anywhere except maybe
users who don't care about the code. Since 3dfx has pushed (and is
still pushing) glide so much, we have ended up with an endless amount
of titles which use glide instead of a standard OpenGL interface to the
graphics hardware. That's where my driver comes in, it is much cleaner
to run these games as unprivileged user processes rather than as root,
especially considering some of the security holes some of them present.

> 
> I suppose that I can dream that one day it will be common to have more
> than one driver to choose from for a given device (e.g. FreeBSD project
> driver and third party driver, ala OSS).  
>

Well the difference here is that, OSS and PCM are for the same function, whereas
these two drivers are for different functions. Perhaps I will look into having a
freebsd glide port which can tear down tdfx.ko and load 3dfx.ko when in use,
then tear down 3dfx.ko and put up tdfx.ko, so there is little difference to the
end user (save some kernel messages).

> Can we adopt a policy of using a prefix+common-name for driver names
> when we have more than one to choose from?
> 
> -- 
> Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / nectar@FreeBSD.org
> 

-- 
Coleman Kane
President, 
UC Free O.S. Users Group - http://pohl.ececs.uc.edu


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000626114717.C61686>