| Previous by date: | 5 Feb 2000 19:38:32 -0000 Re: Technical Framebuffer proposal for RTEMS graphics, Erwin Rol |
| Next by date: | 5 Feb 2000 19:38:32 -0000 Re: Technical Framebuffer proposal for RTEMS graphics, Rosimildo daSilva |
| Previous in thread: | 5 Feb 2000 19:38:32 -0000 Re: Technical Framebuffer proposal for RTEMS graphics, Erwin Rol |
| Next in thread: | 5 Feb 2000 19:38:32 -0000 Re: Technical Framebuffer proposal for RTEMS graphics, Rosimildo daSilva |
: I believe everything is flat without protection in RTEMS ? : but it isn't in Frank's PK, and we might want to make a interface : that works on both ? I see. Well, we should definitely use the ioctl() method so that it doesn't have to be redone when/if protection is added. For some reason, I thought that RTEMS had separate address spaces for user and kernel. Greg
| Previous by date: | 5 Feb 2000 19:38:32 -0000 Re: Technical Framebuffer proposal for RTEMS graphics, Erwin Rol |
| Next by date: | 5 Feb 2000 19:38:32 -0000 Re: Technical Framebuffer proposal for RTEMS graphics, Rosimildo daSilva |
| Previous in thread: | 5 Feb 2000 19:38:32 -0000 Re: Technical Framebuffer proposal for RTEMS graphics, Erwin Rol |
| Next in thread: | 5 Feb 2000 19:38:32 -0000 Re: Technical Framebuffer proposal for RTEMS graphics, Rosimildo daSilva |