On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 11:10:53AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote:
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Kirill Smelkov kirr@mns.spb.ru wrote:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 01:08:14AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
You're right, of course -- UMS is a huge wart on the kernel driver at this point, keeping it working while also adding new functionality continues to cause challenges. We tend to expect that most people will run reasonably contemporaneous kernel and user space code, and so three years after the switch, it continues to surprise us when someone actually tries UMS.
We are planning upgrade to KMS too. The kernel is upgraded more often compared to userspace, because of already mentioned (thanks!) "no regression" rule. Userspace is more complex and more work in my context, so it is lagging, but eventually we'll get there.
Also wanted to say, that if whole X could be built, like the kernel, from one repo without multirepo-setup tool, with 100% reliable working incremental rebuild, etc... it would be a bit easier to upgrade X too.
Sorry for being a bit offtopic, could not resist. I was keeping that though in my head for ~ 2 years already, and now had a chance to mention it.
You don't have to rebuild all of X to use KMS. In most cases, you just need to update the ddx for your card.
I meant the rebuilt not to use KMS, but general case. To me the kernel has one of the great advantage of being lots of self-consistent code because of being maintained in one repo + good build system + good development process. And as the result it is (relatively) easy to upgrade.
Anyway, this is just a note from both kernel and X stranger, so whatever...
Kirill