Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It's Becoming Very Easy To Run Wayland

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • It's Becoming Very Easy To Run Wayland

    Phoronix: It's Becoming Very Easy To Run Wayland

    When Wayland started out in 2008 it was very difficult to build and run this lightweight, next-generation display server. Wayland leverages the very latest Linux graphics technologies and at that time all of Wayland's dependencies had to be patched or built from branched sources and Wayland even had its own EGL implementation at the time (Eagle) rather than Mesa and overall it was just a high barrier to entry. Wayland at that time also worked with only the open-source Intel driver, while now it can work with most any KMS / GEM / Mesa driver. It was not until recently that it became possible to build Wayland from mainline components beginning to ship in new Linux distributions, thereby making it much easier to experiment with the open-source display server. Now it's to a point where you can just run a simple script and be up and running with a Wayland Display Server in just minutes.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=15497

  • #2
    How does Wayland relate to multiseat configurations? Is it yet possible to configure multiple seats and divide the input devices between the seats?

    Comment


    • #3
      I'm curious how it works with newest ATI gallium3D drivers (on RV635). I'm gonna have to clonezilla my system (just in case, you never know..) and try this out. Can't wait any longer.

      Comment


      • #4
        do I see tearing ? Isn't Wayland suppose to eliminate those?

        Comment


        • #5
          Might be tearing on your system rather than on the Wayland system ?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ioannis View Post
            do I see tearing ? Isn't Wayland suppose to eliminate those?
            Tearing has nothing to do with Wayland. It's kernel driver's job. Wayland may only say "I don't want tearing", that's all it can do.

            Comment


            • #7
              The demo looks very interesting...does Wayland actually improve display performance vs the standard Xorg server?

              If Wayland takes off, wonder if nVidia and AMD/ATI will consider providing support for Wayland in their proprietary display drivers?

              What about having to recode applications that make calls to the server, if Wayland's API will be different than Xorg

              Comment


              • #8
                Wayland terminal still segfaults for me on resize. (r600g)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by DeepDayze View Post
                  The demo looks very interesting...does Wayland actually improve display performance vs the standard Xorg server?

                  If Wayland takes off, wonder if nVidia and AMD/ATI will consider providing support for Wayland in their proprietary display drivers?

                  What about having to recode applications that make calls to the server, if Wayland's API will be different than Xorg
                  Fortunately for maybe 98% of apps the transition should be pretty seamless, once toolkits get proper support for wayland. There may (and will) be problems with things like display and window managers, which directly interface with XLib. Also I think (but I'm not sure) some older games use XLib to change the resolution. Ah, and SDL would probably need to be ported too.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by ioannis View Post
                    do I see tearing ? Isn't Wayland suppose to eliminate those?
                    He's running Wayland from within X.. So maybe it's X tearing?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by DeepDayze View Post
                      If Wayland takes off, wonder if nVidia and AMD/ATI will consider providing support for Wayland in their proprietary display drivers?
                      If I understood well, all Wayland needs is KMS and GEM (and I guess DRI2).
                      So, once these are implemented in NVIDIA or AMD driver, Wayland should run without problem.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I don't if this is a valid question and/or if it's a dumb question but if so, I will bow out gracefully and appreciate any corrections.

                        I was wondering if it needs KMS, what does that mean for situations in which kernel modesetting is disabled. That wouldn't be an (optimal) option anymore or?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Panix View Post
                          I don't if this is a valid question and/or if it's a dumb question but if so, I will bow out gracefully and appreciate any corrections.

                          I was wondering if it needs KMS, what does that mean for situations in which kernel modesetting is disabled. That wouldn't be an (optimal) option anymore or?
                          KMS is somewhat the holy grail of graphic mode setting. It promise flicker free graphic context changes. In that sense, every body will want to use it. It will become the norm.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Panix; good question.

                            Today the older UMS code paths provide a good "fail safe" alternative when the newer KMS code has problems. Over time the expectation is that the KMS issues will get resolved (I think it's mostly a matter of remembering/reinventing old hardware-specific hacks and putting something similar for each into KMS), hopefully before the UMS code bitrots and stops being a useful fallback. This all applies mainly to older (ie already supported) hardware.

                            For new hardware support, nearly all of it is being implemented KMS-only anyways.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              why i remember that i read somewhere that KMS is not needed and the protocol can be implemented with different ways.


                              i might be wrong though

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X