On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 23:43 +0200, ext Keith Packard wrote:
> On Thu, 20 May 2010 13:14:34 +0300, Oliver McFadden
> wrote:
>
> > Alright, I'll roll another patch and check it.
>
> I'm waiting to see the updated version of this patch.
Unfortunately I haven't had a chance to work on it yet (work
On Thu, 20 May 2010 13:14:34 +0300, Oliver McFadden
wrote:
> Alright, I'll roll another patch and check it.
I'm waiting to see the updated version of this patch.
--
keith.pack...@intel.com
pgpGj9Rj58jF7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
xorg-deve
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 02:15:54PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> On Tue, 18 May 2010 13:38:20 -0700, Jamey Sharp wrote:
> > Hey, nothing ever wraps miSpriteCursorFuncRec. Can somebody tell me if
> > there's some reason not to kill the function pointer tables there and
> > just call the midispcur.c
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 22:38 +0200, ext Jamey Sharp wrote:
> For the xfree86 DDX, if hardware cursors are used, the driver is
> required to provide a HideCursor function, which will be called
> instead of trying to set a null cursor. I think software cursors are
> already safe. The other DDXes also
On Tue, 18 May 2010 13:38:20 -0700, Jamey Sharp wrote:
>
> Hey, nothing ever wraps miSpriteCursorFuncRec. Can somebody tell me if
> there's some reason not to kill the function pointer tables there and
> just call the midispcur.c functions directly from misprite.c?
That was designed so you could
For the xfree86 DDX, if hardware cursors are used, the driver is
required to provide a HideCursor function, which will be called
instead of trying to set a null cursor. I think software cursors are
already safe. The other DDXes also look safe, as far as I can tell.
I think UnrealizeCursor is never
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 15:16 +0200, Vignatti Tiago (Nokia-D/Helsinki)
wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 08:34:39AM +0200, ext Keith Packard wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 May 2010 08:44:27 +0300, Oliver McFadden
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I suppose for HW cursor it doesn't really matter since we wouldn't take
>
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 08:34:39AM +0200, ext Keith Packard wrote:
> On Tue, 18 May 2010 08:44:27 +0300, Oliver McFadden
> wrote:
>
> > I suppose for HW cursor it doesn't really matter since we wouldn't take
> > damage on that, right? We just draw everything normally, then tell the
> > HW to dra
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 14:54 +0200, Vignatti Tiago (Nokia-D/Helsinki)
wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 06:43:54PM +0200, ext Keith Packard wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 May 2010 07:50:25 +0300, Oliver McFadden
> > wrote:
> > > Previously the cursor code would be called even with a "hidden" cursor.
> > > T
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 06:43:54PM +0200, ext Keith Packard wrote:
> On Mon, 17 May 2010 07:50:25 +0300, Oliver McFadden
> wrote:
> > Previously the cursor code would be called even with a "hidden" cursor.
> > This was because the X server used an invisible 1x1 cursor sprite,
> > rather than a NU
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 08:34 +0200, ext Keith Packard wrote:
> On Tue, 18 May 2010 08:44:27 +0300, Oliver McFadden
> wrote:
>
> > I suppose for HW cursor it doesn't really matter since we wouldn't take
> > damage on that, right? We just draw everything normally, then tell the
> > HW to draw a spr
On Tue, 18 May 2010 08:44:27 +0300, Oliver McFadden
wrote:
> I suppose for HW cursor it doesn't really matter since we wouldn't take
> damage on that, right? We just draw everything normally, then tell the
> HW to draw a sprite at X,Y? (Again, haven't looked at HW cursor code so
> perhaps I'm to
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 18:43 +0200, ext Keith Packard wrote:
> On Mon, 17 May 2010 07:50:25 +0300, Oliver McFadden
> wrote:
> > Previously the cursor code would be called even with a "hidden" cursor.
> > This was because the X server used an invisible 1x1 cursor sprite,
> > rather than a NULL curs
On Mon, 17 May 2010 07:50:25 +0300, Oliver McFadden
wrote:
> Previously the cursor code would be called even with a "hidden" cursor.
> This was because the X server used an invisible 1x1 cursor sprite,
> rather than a NULL cursor.
>
> This will help performance when XDefineCursor() is never call
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 06:50 +0200, Mcfadden Oliver (Nokia-D/Helsinki)
wrote:
> Previously the cursor code would be called even with a "hidden" cursor.
> This was because the X server used an invisible 1x1 cursor sprite,
> rather than a NULL cursor.
>
> This will help performance when XDefineCursor
Previously the cursor code would be called even with a "hidden" cursor.
This was because the X server used an invisible 1x1 cursor sprite,
rather than a NULL cursor.
This will help performance when XDefineCursor() is never called, and
also when the cursor is hidden via XFixesHideCursor() as there
16 matches
Mail list logo
