Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 16:45:17 +0100 From: Stefan Blachmann <sblachmann@gmail.com> To: Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Reasons for keeping sc(4) and libvgl ? Message-ID: <CACc-My0%2B5zi9bsMpLWsOMmP8uiatTCBiJcvkOAS_3%2BXfrNWMvQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20211126160454.3eb827365a02103169ab9adc@bidouilliste.com> References: <20211126160454.3eb827365a02103169ab9adc@bidouilliste.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Main technical reasons why I consider sc(4) essential: - vt/vesa.ko break suspend/resume on nvidia cards. To make suspend/resume work on computers with nvidia, it is necessary to build a kernel *without* vt/vesa modules. See https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=253733 - vt is so horridly buggy that it is no fun to use it at all if one is accustomed to well-working, bugfree sc(4). Just one example: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211922 The hate and disregard against sc(4) and against nvidia and the arrogance that can be observed from some FreeBSD core guys amazes me again and again. I often wonder why Nvidia has not already dropped FreeBSD support due to such attitudes. On 11/26/21, Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> wrote: > > Hello all, > > I'm currently re-implementing the framebuffer code in linuxkpi for > drm-kmod and this made me look at sc(4), vt(4) and friends. > > So I looked at what sc could do and vt couldn't and vice-versa. > > What sc(4) can't do : > > - Work with EFI firmware. > - Support UTF-8 > - Maybe other things but everything here is EFI-based so let me know. > > What vt(4) can't do : > > - You can't get the modes or adapter info with vidcontrol. > vidcontrol -i mode is really made for anything vesa based as it > iterates on all the modes and display them if present. > In the modern world (EFI), we don't have that, EFI GOP doesn't > support changing resolution after ExitBootService was called so there > is only one "mode". I could possibly hack some patch so vidcontrol -i > mode/adapter would work and display the current framebuffer info if > people wants (but I honestly doubt that vidcontrol is useful at all in > an EFI world). > - "Blanking" screen doesn't do what you think it does. For some reason > in vt(4) we just write black colors on the screen and ignore the blank > mode passed in the ioctl. > Now again, blanking/dpms/blah isn't possible with efi_fb but it make > sense to fix vt(4) and drm-kmod so it calls the drm module blanking > function, I'll work on that next week. > - There is no screensaver, again see notes above for dpms but do > people still use sc(4) just for the screensaver ?? > - Maybe other things, please let me know. > > For libvgl it probably made sense back in the 90s but does it now ?? > > Based on my small list I don't see any good reason to keep sc(4) but > maybe I've missed something bigger so please let me know. > > P.S.: I'm really not interested by people saying stuff like > "I've always used sc(4), it works for me don't touch it" > without some technical argument. > > Cheers, > > -- > Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> <manu@freebsd.org> > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACc-My0%2B5zi9bsMpLWsOMmP8uiatTCBiJcvkOAS_3%2BXfrNWMvQ>