priority of paths to kernel modules?
Greg
greg at unrelenting.technology
Sat Aug 25 15:33:10 UTC 2018
On 08/25, Niclas Zeising wrote:
>On 08/24/18 17:20, Warner Losh wrote:
>> This would allow the graphics port to have a rc script that sets
>>this up so when X11 goes to automatically load the module, the right one
>>gets loaded.
>>
>
>I just want to point out that X11 doesn't load the graphics kernel
>driver by default when using the drm-*-kmod ports, and I'm not sure
>the hack to have the intel ddx (xf86-video-intel) load the drm2 driver
>is still around.
>
>It doesn't really matter though, since upstream is moving away from
>having X load the driver, and I'd like us to follow suit by using
>devmatch (this is one of the reasons we wanted to get rid of the base
>drivers, as I've stated before). X can't always know which driver to
>load (when using modesetting for instance), and in my opinion, it
>should be the kernel/loader that decides which drivers to load.
Yes, of course X shouldn't load the driver - also because:
- X is not the only display server people use (I use Weston)
- the console (vt) should also run with the graphics driver! (e.g. efifb
currently conflicts with radeon/amdgpu so you have to turn efifb off
to get anything working on EFI + Radeon, also many ARM boards do not
have any graphics support in U-Boot or whatever firmware)
I'm surprised to hear anyone was relying on the X server to load the
kernel module. I *always* used kld_list.
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list