From owner-freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Thu Feb 28 21:06:39 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-x11@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 610AD1518988 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 21:06:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.95.76.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "troutmask", Issuer "troutmask" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBCC98821F for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 21:06:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x1SL6a0P031328 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 28 Feb 2019 13:06:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x1SL6ZVe031327; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 13:06:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 13:06:35 -0800 From: Steve Kargl To: Cy Schubert Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Yoshihiro Ota , Warner Losh , "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" , FreeBSD X11 mailing list , greg@unrelenting.technology Subject: Re: DRM removal soon Message-ID: <20190228210635.GA31257@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Reply-To: sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu References: <20190228194929.GA18747@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <201902282034.x1SKYWMi006337@slippy.cwsent.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201902282034.x1SKYWMi006337@slippy.cwsent.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.2 (2019-01-07) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: DBCC98821F X-Spamd-Bar: ------ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.98 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.98)[-0.982,0]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: X11 on FreeBSD -- maintaining and support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 21:06:39 -0000 On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 12:34:32PM -0800, Cy Schubert wrote: > In message <20190228194929.GA18747@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Steve > Kargl w > rites: > > On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 11:22:52AM -0800, Cy Schubert wrote: > > > On February 28, 2019 11:15:11 AM PST, Steve Kargl > gton.edu> wrote: > > > >On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:49:51AM -0800, Cy Schubert wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> The ports work as advertised. IMO graphics/drm-legacy should be > > > >> depreciated sooner than later. I would expect the graphics team > > > >> could better spend their time and energy on drm-current, which > > > >> btw works perfectly on my old laptop converted to i386 testbed, > > > >> than maintaining old bitrot. When can we expect drm-legacy to > > > >> finally be removed from ports? > > > >> > > > > > > > >drm-legacy-kmd has already been *depreciated*? > > > > > > > >Perhaps, you meant deprecated. :) > > > > > > > >Hopefully, never. drm-current-kmod locks up my laptop. > > > >drm-legacy-kmod works. > > > > > > Yes. drm-legacy-kmod should be removed from ports sooner > > > than later. drm-current-kind works perfectly on older gear > > > like my 13 year old Pentium-M, which was repurposed as an > > > i386 test platform years ago. > > > > Great drm-current-kmod works for you. > > drm-current-kmod DOES NOT work on my i386 laptop. > > Hmmm. I could never get drm-legacy-kmod to work properly on my old > Pentium-M laptop resorting to VESA. When I upgraded my main laptop > (which also has an i386 partition and two amd64 partitions) to > drm-current-kmod, rsyncing the i386 /usr/local, it worked with a minor > tweak to xorg.conf. > > Using drm-legacy-kmod on the old machine would initially freeze the > display, ultimately freezing the whole machine. No such issues with > drm-current-kmod. > Seems our experiences are exact opposites. :( I suppose it is the bane of those of who cannot afford new hardware every 2 or 3 years. > > > The reason to remove old software from base is evident. > > > The same reason holds for ports as well. The ports team > > > are also a limited resource. > > > > The drm-legacy-kmod port works. It would never have been > > broken (and it would be unneeded) if the *working* drm2 code > > in base were never disconnected from the build. The > > drm-legacy-kmod port would not have been broken for a month > > if an exp-run were done when modifications to pmap.h had > > been done. > > The issue is developer time. > Yes, I know all to well. I started working on libm some 15 to 20 years ago because I need(ed) long double version of the Bessel function routines. Still, haven't found the time to write those functions. > > > > I get it. drm-current-kmod works for you, so lets penalize > > everyone else by removing working code. > > The graphics team supports four DRM ports. When FreeBSD-13 will be > released that will become five. This is unsustainable. Additionally > i386 and for that matter all 32-platform support has become an > afterthought. More often than not it is 32-bit that breaks. This is > especially true when what one expects to be a simple one line commit > that works on amd64 totally hoses i386. drm-legacy-kmod was broken on > i386 for a while for this very reason. I haven't looked at what the drm-fbsd11.2-kmod or 12.0 mean. I assume that these are the ports for 11-stable and 12-stable, and I assume that these work on those specific stable branches. If that is the case, then there is no support needed by graphics teams unless a src committer merges somethings from -current that breaks stability. If the MFC is a security fix, then the graphics teams may need to asked about helping troubleshoot the 11.2 and 12.0 kmods; otherwise, then MFC should not happen if it breaks stability. Or, perhaps, I have a s different definition of 'stable. -- Steve