On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 01:02, Ian Romanick wrote:
Michel Dnzer wrote:
On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 18:26, Ian Romanick wrote:
[...] we don't want the R200 driver to expose GLX_MESA_swap_control
if there's no vblank interrupt available. Since it can't implement
the functionality, we don't want
Keith Whitwell wrote:
Ian Romanick wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:20:28 -0700
Ian Romanick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
I see: C SPECIFICATION
const char * glXQueryExtensionsString( Display *dpy,
int screen
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:12:47 -0600
Brian Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Keith Whitwell wrote:
Ian Romanick wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
I observed that glXQueryExtensionsString calls glXInitialize first which
in turn loads and initializes the dri drivers (calls their createScreen
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 16:01:22 -0700
Ian Romanick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:58:58 -0700
Ian Romanick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
Do the __driRegisterExtensions functions in the drivers rely on being
called during
I'm inclined to believe that the comments in dri_glx.c are just
wrong. __glXRegisterExtensions has to be called before a call to
glXGetProcAddress. The app can query that string via
glXQueryExtensionsString long before calling glXGetProcAddress. In
fact, it may never call
Felix Kühling wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 16:01:22 -0700
Ian Romanick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:58:58 -0700
Ian Romanick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
Do the __driRegisterExtensions functions in the drivers rely on being
called
Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
I'm inclined to believe that the comments in dri_glx.c are just
wrong. __glXRegisterExtensions has to be called before a call to
glXGetProcAddress. The app can query that string via
glXQueryExtensionsString long before calling glXGetProcAddress. In
The dynamic extension code has made the radeon drivers
dependent on the GLX subsystem. I just imported the
current r200 driver into my version of the embedded
Mesa system. Embedded Mesa doesn't have a GLX
subsystem. Neither does DirectFB.
What do you think about reworking these functions to
On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 18:26, Ian Romanick wrote:
[...] we don't want the R200 driver to expose GLX_MESA_swap_control
if there's no vblank interrupt available. Since it can't implement
the functionality, we don't want to advertise it.
It could poll for vertical blank...
--
Earthling
Felix Kühling wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:58:58 -0700
Ian Romanick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
Hi,
as I'm going to clean up vsync related stuff on the config-0-0-1-branch
I read the code for dynamic glx extension registration in
xc/lib/GL/dri/dri_glx.c and
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:20:28 -0700
Ian Romanick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
I see:
C SPECIFICATION
const char * glXQueryExtensionsString( Display *dpy,
int screen )
I don't mean what the GLX specification says to
Felix Kühling wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:20:28 -0700
Ian Romanick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
I see:
C SPECIFICATION
const char * glXQueryExtensionsString( Display *dpy,
int screen )
I don't mean what the GLX specification
Michel Dnzer wrote:
On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 18:26, Ian Romanick wrote:
[...] we don't want the R200 driver to expose GLX_MESA_swap_control
if there's no vblank interrupt available. Since it can't implement
the functionality, we don't want to advertise it.
It could poll for vertical blank...
I
Ian Romanick wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:20:28 -0700
Ian Romanick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
I see: C SPECIFICATION
const char * glXQueryExtensionsString( Display *dpy,
int screen )
I don't mean what
On Mer, 2003-07-30 at 22:28, Michel Dnzer wrote:
On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 18:26, Ian Romanick wrote:
[...] we don't want the R200 driver to expose GLX_MESA_swap_control
if there's no vblank interrupt available. Since it can't implement
the functionality, we don't want to advertise it.
Alan Cox wrote:
On Mer, 2003-07-30 at 22:28, Michel Dnzer wrote:
On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 18:26, Ian Romanick wrote:
[...] we don't want the R200 driver to expose GLX_MESA_swap_control
if there's no vblank interrupt available. Since it can't implement
the functionality, we don't want to
Hi,
as I'm going to clean up vsync related stuff on the config-0-0-1-branch
I read the code for dynamic glx extension registration in
xc/lib/GL/dri/dri_glx.c and xc/lib/GL/glx/glxextensions.[ch]. I stumbled
over this comment in front of __glXRegisterExtensions:
** In older versions of libGL
Felix Kühling wrote:
Hi,
as I'm going to clean up vsync related stuff on the config-0-0-1-branch
I read the code for dynamic glx extension registration in
xc/lib/GL/dri/dri_glx.c and xc/lib/GL/glx/glxextensions.[ch]. I stumbled
over this comment in front of __glXRegisterExtensions:
** In older
Felix Kühling wrote:
Hi,
as I'm going to clean up vsync related stuff on the config-0-0-1-branch
I read the code for dynamic glx extension registration in
xc/lib/GL/dri/dri_glx.c and xc/lib/GL/glx/glxextensions.[ch]. I stumbled
over this comment in front of __glXRegisterExtensions:
** In older
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:58:58 -0700
Ian Romanick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
Hi,
as I'm going to clean up vsync related stuff on the config-0-0-1-branch
I read the code for dynamic glx extension registration in
xc/lib/GL/dri/dri_glx.c and
Felix Kühling wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:58:58 -0700
Ian Romanick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Kühling wrote:
Do the __driRegisterExtensions functions in the drivers rely on being
called during initialisation?
In fact I believe it could be dangerous if __driRegisterExtensions was
called
21 matches
Mail list logo
