[PATCH] fb: Fix memcpy abuse

[Jeremy Huddleston]

On May 21, 2011, at 05:03, Siarhei Siamashka wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Soeren Sandmann <sandmann at cs.au.dk> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> If I remember correctly, the main objection I had to the overlapped blt
>> patch was that it inlined the C fallback into all the SIMD versions
>> instead of just calling down through the delegate.
> 
> That's quite easy to fix. Too bad that this problem was brought up on
> xorg-devel mailing list a few weeks too late for overlapped pixman_blt
> to be introduced in pixman 0.22.0. My main concern earlier was about
> how to use the newly added pixman features in xserver and provide a
> smooth upgrade path without breaking anything. But now I understand
> that it just requires adding this feature to pixman, then wait till
> the next stable pixman version 0.24.0 goes out, then add the needed
> changes to xserver to use this feature and bump the required pixman
> version to 0.24.0 at the same time. And finally the users will be able
> to enjoy faster non-hardware accelerated scrolling after the next
> stable xserver version gets released and adopted by linux distros.
> Right?

Yeah, that's about right.  Get it into pixman-0.23.x.  Once we actually have a 0.23.x release of pixman, we can add that functionality to xserver master with appropriate dependency-foo added to configure.ac.  Looking at past release cycles, my guess is that 0.24 will be out around the same time as xorg-server-1.11, so I don't think there will be any objections to such a dependency... Soren, can you please confirm my assumptions here =)

> Sure. Just these other things are much less commonly used and do not
> require any urgent attention. It's more like a code
> refactoring/cleanup work but not something that is clearly beneficial
> for the end users.

Refactoring and code cleanup is almost always beneficial for the end users, albeit indirectly.  It helps us more easily spot bugs and more easily maintain the codebase.

--Jeremy