Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:00:08 -0800
From:      Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net>
To:        "Brian S. Julin" <bri@tull.umassp.edu>
Cc:        Nicolas Souchu <nsouch@fr.alcove.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, KGI Devel <kgi-develop@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject:   Re: kld VM pager
Message-ID:  <20011206110008.B4782@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0112061231110.8477-100000@tull.umassp.edu>; from bri@tull.umassp.edu on Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 01:13:55PM -0500
References:  <20011206164253.J13566@cedar.alcove-fr> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0112061231110.8477-100000@tull.umassp.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--mojUlQ0s9EVzWg2t
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 01:13:55PM -0500, Brian S. Julin wrote:
>=20
>=20
> I'll take a shot at qualifying what is is that KGI wants:
>=20
> Yes, we definitely want page-fault handlers if we can possibly=20
> get them:
>=20
> 1) For fossil cards where the aperture is smaller than the VRAM,
>    with impossible-or-dangerous-to-expose-to-userpace aperture=20
>    control.  Also this provides naive applications with often desired
>    contiguous direct buffer access.
> 2) For fossil planar mode cards with dangerous-to-expose-to-userspace=20
>    plane-mask controls, to allow for direct access to different=20
>    planes/plane-masks such that naive applications need not
>    explicitly use an IOCTL to set the plane masks. *

> * Why support such cretinous hardware?  Laptops.  Especially of the
> non-x86 variety.

I'm curious how likely either of these are to come up on platforms
FreeBSD is likely to support.  I'm sure Linux and NetBSD will find
them, but FreeBSD's focus is on "modern", "popular" architectures.
The architectures with active ports either working or being developed
are i386, ia64, x86-64, sparc64 (pci only for now), PowerPC, and alpha.
There's also a rather inactive arm port (the list hasn't even been
spammed since August) and a proposed MIPS port with no one working on it.
Add the fact that actual 386 and 486sx parts are not supported by the
GENERIC kernel in 5.0-current and I'm wondering if either of these weird
types of hardware are going to appear anytime soon outside of some really
strange situations.

If it got us a port sooner with fewer bugs, I'd certaintly be happy to
see the FreeBSD port not support ancient hardware.  Linux and NetBSD are
both doing an excelent job in that space.

-- Brooks

--=20
Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE.
PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529  9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4

--mojUlQ0s9EVzWg2t
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE8D8A3XY6L6fI4GtQRAk0lAJ4njyvLdk6yr996AZi9PduDvqy9iwCdGa62
MrUF7pWmXzzeoELnBRKtgok=
=wEzR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--mojUlQ0s9EVzWg2t--

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011206110008.B4782>