On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 11:52 +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> Anyway, this isn't my concern. It's that the client should not have to
> block any earlier than when it needs to render to a buffer with a
> pending buffer swap.
Right, that's why Kristian proposed the two-request solution, one async
one t
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 5:52 AM, Michel Dänzer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 12:50 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 6:57 AM, Michel Dänzer
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 15:30 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I have
On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 12:50 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 6:57 AM, Michel Dänzer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 15:30 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> >>
> >> I have pushed the DRI2 update to the dri2proto, mesa, xserver, and
> >> xf86-video-inte
On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 16:31 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> We can just submit the swap buffer commands, wait for them to fire and
> then send the reply. What we do now is to wait for vblank and then
> submit the swap commands, what I'm suggesting is to submit the
> commands and wait for vblank
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 1:29 PM, Keith Packard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 12:50 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
>
>> Are you thinking that the DRI client will do the wait-for-vblank and
>> then post the swap buffer request? That's clearly not feasible, but
>> my thinking wa
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 12:50:18PM -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 6:57 AM, Michel Dänzer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Have you considered any other schemes, e.g. some kind of event triggered
> > when a buffer swap actually takes effect, and which includes information
On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 12:50 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> Are you thinking that the DRI client will do the wait-for-vblank and
> then post the swap buffer request? That's clearly not feasible, but
> my thinking was that the waiting will be done in the X server, thus
> the flags argument to DR
On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 12:57 +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> Also, I'm wondering if xDRI2Buffer should have a buffer size field, or
> if any buffer size padding requirements beyond height * pitch can always
> be handled in the driver components.
GEM has all of this information in the kernel, so that
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 10:42 AM, Brian Paul
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michel Dänzer wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 15:30 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
>>>
>>> I have pushed the DRI2 update to the dri2proto, mesa, xserver, and
>>> xf86-video-intel trees in ~krh. It's on the master branch i
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 6:57 AM, Michel Dänzer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 15:30 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
>>
>> I have pushed the DRI2 update to the dri2proto, mesa, xserver, and
>> xf86-video-intel trees in ~krh. It's on the master branch in those repos.
>
> I don't s
Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 15:30 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
>> I have pushed the DRI2 update to the dri2proto, mesa, xserver, and
>> xf86-video-intel trees in ~krh. It's on the master branch in those repos.
>
> I don't see anything younger than 5 months in your xf86-video-in
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:57:55 +0200
Michel Dänzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 15:30 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> > The way this works now, is that when ctx->Driver.Viewport is called
> > (and thus at least when binding a drawable to a context), the DRI
> > driver calls ba
On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 15:30 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
>
> I have pushed the DRI2 update to the dri2proto, mesa, xserver, and
> xf86-video-intel trees in ~krh. It's on the master branch in those repos.
I don't see anything younger than 5 months in your xf86-video-intel
repo.
> The way this
13 matches
Mail list logo
