[Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

[Kirill Smelkov]

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 at 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