Re: DRM kernel source broken/incomplete

On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 07:52:28AM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>Alex Deucher dixit:
>
>>> >and two for bsd
>>> >
>>> >1. bsd                 monolithic
>>> >2. bsd-core            modular as above
>
>>why not just let the kernel provide the drm?  Most if not all recent
>>linux and bsd kernels (last few years) have drm support.  The dri and
>>ddx will adapt depending on what's available in the kernel.
>
>For the record, "BSD" seems to mean FreeBSD exclusively here
>(and maybe DragonFly, which relates to FreeBSD like MirOS
>relates to OpenBSD, namely being a fork).
>
>I've tried to build DRI/DRM on OpenBSD and MirOS for XF86 4.4;
>I eventually got DRI working but it just blanked the screen
>instead of using Mesa when it didn't find a DRM, which is a
>K.O. criterium, thus I haven't looked deeper into it.
>
>The DRM use FreeBSD-ish <bsd.kmod.mk> whereas OpenBSD and derivates
>have <bsd.lkm.mk>, and from a short glimpse on the code I've
>got the impression it's non-trivial to support OpenBSD too.
>I'm not too experienced in kernel programming though.

That's pretty much the same conclusion I came to.

>I think we _can_ load kernel modules though, I've played with
>a VMware 3 module some time (but VMware didn't want to play
>with me, so I left).
>
>If that "screen blank, no Mesa" issue is fixed, you could
>probably enable DRI builds on OpenBSD and MirOS, too. I
>haven't looked into it on 4.5 yet.

It only makes sense if working DRM modules are available though.

David