Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: XWayland GLAMOR & DRI3 Support Added In Mainline X.Org Server

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,350

    Default XWayland GLAMOR & DRI3 Support Added In Mainline X.Org Server

    Phoronix: XWayland GLAMOR & DRI3 Support Added In Mainline X.Org Server

    A commit to the X.Org Server code-base tonight added GLAMOR and DRI3 support for XWayland...

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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    704

    Default

    Is anything special needed to make use of GLAMOR for Xwayland like further patches to mutter? I have built Xwayland from Kristians own Xorg branch a month ago, which already had these changes as far as I know, but in Gnome 3.12 it was still using llvmpipe for Xwayland. The mutter build I'm using is a bit old though. It's the snapshot right after Xwayland DDX support was added since the newest version of mutter don't work with the rest of Gnome 3.12.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackout23 View Post
    Is anything special needed to make use of GLAMOR for Xwayland like further patches to mutter?
    You need mesa 10.2 and mutter 3.13.x ... 3.12 does not work with the "new" (ddx less) xwayland.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Could it be possible that nvidia releases a Wayland-compatible version of their closed source driver in conjunction with the XServer 1.16 release? If I remember correctly there was a discussion about XWayland compatibility and their driver on a mailing list a few weeks ago, I might be wrong though.

    Or is XWayland support not necessary to be compatible with the 1.16 release?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,006

    Default Benchmark?

    Exciting!

    I wish to see a Wayland vs XWayland vs X.org benchmark.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Without benchmarks I can predict the results:

    Gnome doesn't bypass compositing yet for fullscreen app, thus decreasing performance because of the copy done by compositing.
    Present support is not merged for XWayland, thus it uses the Present fallback, which caps the number of copies it does to 60 per seconds (in contrary to dri2 with vblank_mode=0).

    Thus the result is: slower for slow apps ( < 60 fps), faster for fast apps (> 60 fps), if we compare to a desktop bypassing compositing, and using dri2.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    704

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drago01 View Post
    You need mesa 10.2 and mutter 3.13.x ... 3.12 does not work with the "new" (ddx less) xwayland.
    Currently I'm using this snapshot of mutter-wayland (https://git.gnome.org/browse/mutter/...5413246543.zip) which is still compatiable with the rest of Gnome 3.12. It's a snapshot just after the Xwayland DDX support was added. I tested it out with nouveau, which is getting glamor support aswell I think.

    Gnome 3.12 on Wayland already is very promising. The missing mouse pointer acceleration is basically the only thing that's bugging me. Sometimes I have to click a window titlebar first before it takes any input (like gnome-terminal). Other than that I could see myself using it fulltime.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mannerov View Post
    Without benchmarks I can predict the results:

    Gnome doesn't bypass compositing yet for fullscreen app, thus decreasing performance because of the copy done by compositing.
    Present support is not merged for XWayland, thus it uses the Present fallback, which caps the number of copies it does to 60 per seconds (in contrary to dri2 with vblank_mode=0).

    Thus the result is: slower for slow apps ( < 60 fps), faster for fast apps (> 60 fps), if we compare to a desktop bypassing compositing, and using dri2.
    Interesting.

    What about when GNOME supports bypass composting? (I assume it eventually will)
    What about when PRESENT support is merged for XWayland? (I assume it will)

    What about when comparing using DRI3 instead of DRI2?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Interesting.

    What about when GNOME supports bypass composting? (I assume it eventually will)
    I do have patches .. still not finished have been busy lately but still plan to finish them in time for 3.14.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    827

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Weegee View Post
    Could it be possible that nvidia releases a Wayland-compatible version of their closed source driver in conjunction with the XServer 1.16 release? If I remember correctly there was a discussion about XWayland compatibility and their driver on a mailing list a few weeks ago, I might be wrong though.

    Or is XWayland support not necessary to be compatible with the 1.16 release?
    who knows what nvidia has planned, but here's hoping for Wayland support [outside of running wayland with X11-backend, which works fine on nvidia/blob].

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •