[Linaro-mm-sig] Split GEM from the rest of DRM

[Clark, Rob]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 5:21 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> wrote:
>> On Thursday 21 April 2011 19:48:36 Jordan Crouse wrote:
>>>
>>> During the MM BoF at ELC, it seemed to me that one of the things that scared
>>> most ARM vendors away from GEM in the first place is that was perceived to be
>>> too closely married to the rest of DRM (especially KMS).
>>
>> Interestingly, my impression at the BoF was that people didn't like GEM
>> and DRM but still wanted to have KMS with their own drivers ;-)
>
> The question is why don't these people like DRM? these people are
> willing to pile binary blobs with fucked up HAL layers in them, or GPL
> code with wasteful abstractions, and they claim the DRM is too
> heavyweight?

I would hazard a guess that it is more an issue of documentation and
lack of familiarity with DRM that scares some off..

BR,
-R

> It wouldn't take more than a day or two's work to make most of the
> legacy DRM core optional, and split it out into separate modules
> maybe.
>
> Like the whole legacy buffer management/VM interactions could be split
> out and drivers that need it could load it.
>
> Dave.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linaro-mm-sig mailing list
> Linaro-mm-sig at lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-mm-sig
>