Re: Let's vote for PnP on 2.2 (Was: PnP in 2.2 ?)

Albert D. Cahalan (acahalan@cs.uml.edu)
Mon, 8 Dec 1997 19:13:13 -0500 (EST)


>> In both cases, stability was/is poor. In a unix system, hardware
>> access is supposed to be through the kernel. See /dev and /proc.
>
> on Win95 and NT the video layer hits the hardware directly and is
> kind of a ring 0 process - like ours.

Only the plain console is ring 0. You can kill your X server.
With a Cirrus board at least, you can't even fix the result with
a warm reboot. The out-of-memory policy makes it easy to kill X.

"Your Linux box crashed? Oh, just hit the power switch..."

> Possibly it could make better use of irq/dma hooks and stuff - the mode
> restore is trivial - its a single notifier hook and some modules that
> just load/unload notifier hooked routines to save/restore video mode.

Video hardware is not that simple. (of course it should be...)

> Doing all video via the kernel is bad- the intel CPU's are
> very slow when crossing protection and ring boundaries

This is why GGI avoids crossing protection and ring boundaries.
The last time I heard, they had a 2-page sized command queue.

As things are now, the kernel is starting to collect ad-hoc video
drivers for various non-i386 hardware.