> From: Javier Celaya <javier.cel...@flexvdi.com > <mailto:javier.cel...@flexvdi.com>> > Date: Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 12:17 PM > Subject: Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH win-vdagent] Provide support for Windows > CCD API > To: spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > <mailto:spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org> > > > Hi, > > El mié, 03-08-2016 a las 04:57 -0400, Frediano Ziglio escribió: > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 11:35:56AM +0300, Sameeh Jubran wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > We've already looked into those patches (Javier's patches) and > > > > tested them. > > > > > > Ah ok, I must have missed your answer to Javier's series. > > > > > > > We found that on the contrary to our patches, > > > > multi-monitor support and arbitrary resolution do not work with > > > > the patches > > > > posted by Javier. Even though arbitrary resolution > > > > resolution is implemented in Javier's patches, it is not fully > > > > arbitrary. > > And full arbitrary resolution would be too complicated to add on top of > Javier's series, hence the decision to go with an entirely different > series? Sorry for the basic questions, I'm really not familiar with > Windows API :) > > Christophe > > > > Not at all. I did not implement multi-monitor support because that > required to break the interface with the last kernel driver version at > that moment (it only supported one operation, setting an arbitrary > resolution). So it is only a matter of writing the new escapes. > > On the other hand, I limited arbitrary resolutions to even sizes > because, again, that was what the kernel driver was doing at that > moment. That restriction is gone now, so my code can be adjusted to > really arbitrary resolutions.
Hi Javier, First of all, I’m sorry for the mess created with this submission, that was not intentional and we’re doing everything possible for fix it. Patches we are submitting now already support these 2 features, and we are going to submit corresponding driver patches as soon as this series get accepted. We also did a few improvements on top of this patches (see RFC pathes I sent a few days ago), that will be submitted as well. If I understand correctly, at that point you’ll be able to rebase your work on top of these patches and get the same functionality you have now + additional features. Do you have any problem with this approach? Thanks, Dmitry > > > > Frediano > _______________________________________________ > Spice-devel mailing list > Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org <mailto:Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel > <https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel> > > > _______________________________________________ > Spice-devel mailing list > Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org <mailto:Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel > <https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel> > > > > -- > Respectfully, > Sameeh Jubran > Linkedin <https://il.linkedin.com/pub/sameeh-jubran/87/747/a8a> > Junior Software Engineer @ Daynix <http://www.daynix.com/>.
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
