[PATCH 2/2] I/O port access routines

[Tiago Vignatti]

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 01:45:57AM +0100, ext Luc Verhaegen wrote:
> 
> But the main point of this mail was ignored. Why did existing xorg pci 
> infrastructure have to be reinvented like that instead of adding a new 
> backend and fixing up the bad patches? Why did RAC get thrown away like 
> that? Why does this NIH have to keep on repeating itself?
> 

The main reason is because we were needing a PCI resource broker for the
entire system and not for one process only. And X was touching the PCI
resources directly with RAC.. oops! We don't need and our 21st century's
kernels do it pretty well for us :)


            Tiago