[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Ubuntu plans for Natty release

On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 09:33 +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Mit, 2010-11-10 at 18:57 +1100, Christopher James Halse Rogers
> wrote: 
> > 
> > 1) Ship both the classic and gallium versions of r300 & r600, and have
> > the DDX select between them based on kms support and an xorg.conf
> > setting (default to r300g, as that's the default upstream, and whichever
> > r600 driver ends up being default in 7.10).  This is not going to be
> > accepted upstream, but is, I think, a reasonable distro-patch to retain
> > UMS support for radeon while defaulting to the upstream-default driver.
> IMHO any solution which doesn't allow easily choosing between the 3D
> drivers during the X server's runtime (when KMS is enabled) isn't
> adequate.

Certainly not adequate for driver development, but is it necessary for
end-users?  This would be necessary for allowing per-application
overrides, but should we care about this?

Mainly I'm concerned with ensuring that users who turn off KMS get 3D.
I don't expect upstream to care or support this; focusing on kms/gallium
is a perfectly reasonable decision to make.  From our end though, if UMS
is *not too much effort* to keep going then it's both useful for
debugging (when UMS works & KMS doesn't) and allows people to have a
usable system while those bugs are being fixed.

Changing the DRI driver name when using UMS seems like the simplest
solution here, and once we're doing that it's close to no extra effort
to add an xorg.conf option for users to twiddle.

Can you see an easy solution which allows changes during X's runtime and
will handle UMS transparently?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: