On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 17:02 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 15:09 -0500, Michel DÃnzer wrote: > > On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 10:19 -0500, Alex Deucher wrote: > > > > > > I think long term though, a better solution would be to get rid of > > > mergedfb and handle each head separately but just change the 2d/3d > > > engines offsets depending on which head you are rendering to. then > > > you wouldn't have to worry about the limits so much (although some of > > > these new super hi-res LCDs would still need some work). > > > > Yep, and as a bonus you'll have to solve basically all of the issues of > > multi-card Xinerama. If there's a benefit to that (other than making the > > exotic multi-card Xinerama possible or at least easier), I'm afraid I > > don't see it. Fixing the remaining MergedFB issues seems much easier and > > more useful to me. > > Hrm... I tend to disagree :) MergedFB is a hack imho. It's much saner in > the long run to fix the issues of multi-card Xinerama.
I agree that would be nice, but I honestly don't see any benefit it would offer over MergedFB in the single card case. What am I missing? -- Earthling Michel DÃnzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer Libre software enthusiast | http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_ide95&alloc_id396&op=click -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
