Pointing out the OpenVG spec for an OpenVG library isn’t very useful, obviously that’s what this provides.
So if the 3D version of the driver simply emulates OpenVG on the 3D GPU, and since you claim there is no issues with the 2D version. Then what possible reason is there for having the 3D emulation be the default? On 2015-11-16, 2:30 PM, "Sundararaj Prabhu" <[email protected]> wrote: >comments inline > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Sébastien Taylor [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >Sébastien Taylor >Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 10:20 AM >To: Sundararaj Prabhu-B36876 <[email protected]>; Otavio >Salvador <[email protected]>; Viguera, Javier ><[email protected]>; Post Lauren-RAA013 <[email protected]>; >Hochstein Tom-R60874 <[email protected]> >Cc: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] Different use of libOpenVG in meta-fsl-arm and >official meta-fsl-bsp-release > >Also related to this subject, it is not clear to me what these two libraries >provide exactly. >>> https://www.khronos.org/openvg/ > >If either are available does that mean emulating OpenVG using the 3D GPU when >using the 3d flavour of the library? >>> yes > >What is the use-case for this? >>> https://www.khronos.org/openvg/ >Target Applications > >Are there issues with the 2d library that might cause a user to want to >emulate OpenVG? >>> No issues > > > > >On 2015-11-16, 9:00 AM, "Sundararaj Prabhu" ><[email protected] on behalf of >[email protected]> wrote: > >>It is customer preference to choose libOpenVG.3d or libOpenVG.2d and it is >>build time decision. Not sure whether the current recipe provide the build >>options to choose libOpenVG.3d or libOpenVG.2d for DQ. But this is easily >>fixable. >> >>But it is hard to use the same rootfs when need for OpenVG.3D on DL/solo and >>OpenVG.2D for i.MX6DQ. >>We know the expectation is runtime identification or export variable switch, >>but currently not supported. >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Otavio Salvador [mailto:[email protected]] >>Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 9:24 AM >>To: Viguera, Javier <[email protected]>; Post Lauren-RAA013 >><[email protected]>; Hochstein Tom-R60874 >><[email protected]> >>Cc: [email protected]; Sundararaj Prabhu-B36876 >><[email protected]> >>Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] Different use of libOpenVG in >>meta-fsl-arm and official meta-fsl-bsp-release >> >>On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Viguera, Javier <[email protected]> >>wrote: >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Otavio Salvador [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> >>>> >>>> This highlights a serious problem. Freescale says the QDL are >>>> software compatible however this symlink mangle breaks this >>>> assumption. Mainly it is not possible to use same rootfs, in read-only, >>>> for them all. >>>> >>>> I added few Freescale people on Cc so they can comment on it. >>> >>> Did you get any feedback on this? >>> >>> Anyone? >> >>I am still waiting; I discussed this with Lauren and she said she were going >>to check this internally. I added her on Cc so she can comment on this. >> >>-- >>Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems >>http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br >>Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750 >>-- >>_______________________________________________ >>meta-freescale mailing list >>[email protected] >>https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale > -- _______________________________________________ meta-freescale mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale
