Dieter N�tzel wrote: > > Hello, > > as you all should have noticed the Linux kernel team has this under > development (2.5 and backport patches for 2.4.17+). So I would sharp your > senses, that we should consider this when we do new DRM stuff. > > I think there is ongoing discussion in the Mach 64 group (udelay vs sleep)? > As I recall it right there was something in the "old" Mesa source (old voodoo > driver, commented sleep(1000)) to get lower CPU usage. > But I can't find it in the tdfx tree, again.
It will probably be 3 years before the 2.5 kernel is in widespread use... Keith _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
