Why kdrive ?

Mirko Vogt lists at nanl.de
Wed Oct 15 12:10:18 CEST 2008


as far as I know there's a special modified version of kdrive (called xglamo) to accelerate the glamo-chip within the device.
These (hardcoded) changes are based on kdrive and I think that's the reason why kdrive is used instead of xorg.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.



Abelenda wrote:
> Hi I just recieved an interesting mail in the Xorg MailingList this was
> the contents :
>>> Why not just go for the full X11?  Memory wise I found no difference
>>> in the memory usage between X11 and kdrive on the OMAP.
>> I am told that the full Xorg isn't very happy when built against
>> uClibc.
> So here's my question, if the memory footprint of kdrive is the same as
> the full xorg, why choose kdrive over the full xorg ?
> There might be interesing features in the full server that aren't there
> in kdrive. Plus I've read here that the X driver has got duplicate code
> in the X driver from the framebuffer, so there's no really gain in term
> of size of the driver either...
> So here's my question if I am totally wrong or asked a totally stupid
> question I am sorry, as I don't know all the implications.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Openmoko community mailing list
> community at lists.openmoko.org
> http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community

More information about the community mailing list