Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 10:46:38 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Justin Hibbits <jhibbits@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: newcons fb driver Message-ID: <BEC91EEE-1EE4-45B5-8500-FEE055D613D4@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <CAHSQbTBTq6EKD_crn=rvbeUcAEBn7E%2B=U8wRHeqchazF1LhjwQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <42130.1393829535@critter.freebsd.dk> <5314B2A2.3060100@pix.net> <CAHSQbTBTq6EKD_crn=rvbeUcAEBn7E%2B=U8wRHeqchazF1LhjwQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 3, 2014, at 10:44 AM, Justin Hibbits <jhibbits@freebsd.org> = wrote: > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Kurt Lidl <lidl@pix.net> wrote: >>> In message <CAJ-Vmo=3DjCGUxXs_GBoCm581wTouozWE=3DAQ3x1wBKYM_J3_dGrg = at >>> mail.gmail.com> >>>=20 >>> , Adrian Chadd writes: >>>=20 >>>> .. i'm pretty sure there was a reason for why it's done in byte = sizes. >>>> Maybe speak to phk? >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Buggy video hardware, which does not do larger writes correctly, >>> the most recent one being an Intel Laptop, but I can't remember = which. >>>=20 >>> At the very least, byte writes needs to be a boot-time option. >>=20 >>=20 >> Intel Atom boards, as I recall: >>=20 >> http://freshbsd.org/commit/freebsd/r237203 >>=20 >> -Kurt >=20 > All great knowledge, but really only answers half of what I'm looking > for (always good to know potential pitfalls). Assuming a > tunable/sysctl is added, what's the best way to optimize from my > original post? Use a backing buffer (potentially with a tunable to > not)? Or assume we don't support background images, and write the > background color in the masked pixels? Most of the issues are with the CHARACTER buffer, not the actual frame = (pixel) buffer=85 Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BEC91EEE-1EE4-45B5-8500-FEE055D613D4>