[patch] VRAM detection in controlfb
Michel Lanners
mlan at cpu.lu
Wed Jun 7 07:58:47 EST 2000
Hi all,
On 6 Jun, this message from Michael Schmitz echoed through cyberspace:
>> Anyways, that's the long answer. The short answer is: no, you probably
>> don't want to cache the framebuffer.
>
> Thanks for the long answer, and all those nasty gremlins have actually
> been observed long time ago when people started to play with the
> framebuffer drivers. At least on m68k, the framebuffer address space was
> set non-cacheable right from the start (in head.S). I would hope that
> somehow translated to PPC as well :-)
That's what fbmem.c does in its default mmap(). However, at least for
control (and maybe other comparable video implementations as well), you
get much better performance on scroll and other fb-to-fb copy
operations, without visible inconvenients, when the framebuffer is set
to write-through caching.
For fun, I tried write-back caching as well. Makes for some really nice
visual effects when your killed netscape starts to fade away as the
cache gets slowly flushed ;-))) And it doesn't even get you any speed
improvement...
Michel
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michel Lanners | " Read Philosophy. Study Art.
23, Rue Paul Henkes | Ask Questions. Make Mistakes.
L-1710 Luxembourg |
email mlan at cpu.lu |
http://www.cpu.lu/~mlan | Learn Always. "
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list