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

Kirill Smelkov kirr at mns.spb.ru
Fri Jul 22 23:31:02 CEST 2011


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.



Thanks,
Kirill



More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list