Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Canonical Working On Mesa Code Again For Mir

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,565

    Default Canonical Working On Mesa Code Again For Mir

    Phoronix: Canonical Working On Mesa Code Again For Mir

    With Canonical's small X.Org team back to publishing patches on the Mesa mailing list, it looks like they might be trying again soon for pushing forward their Mir EGL back-end...

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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    156

    Default

    we'll see in the coming days if Canonical tries to mainline their Mir back-end itself for Mesa or just simply is trying to reduce the maintenance workload in supporting the out-of-tree code by pushing forward some code (i.e. today's patches)
    I don't think it's only that.

    The Mir backend lives in a part of Mesa that doesn't change much, whereas the DRIimage v7 code (the patches here) lives in a part that can change more. It makes more sense to merge it (and avoid other programers to write again this code, which is partially needed for DRI3 support).

    We need this for Prime on Wayland, and for writing glamor dri3 helpers. And RAOF also published again more complete patches, because I asked him, telling him the needs of glamor (the __DRiimage v6 bits were missing from previous patches, and glamor would need them, so he added them) and Prime on Wayland.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Russe, Bulgaria
    Posts
    505

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mannerov View Post
    I don't think it's only that.

    The Mir backend lives in a part of Mesa that doesn't change much, whereas the DRIimage v7 code (the patches here) lives in a part that can change more. It makes more sense to merge it (and avoid other programers to write again this code, which is partially needed for DRI3 support).

    We need this for Prime on Wayland, and for writing glamor dri3 helpers. And RAOF also published again more complete patches, because I asked him, telling him the needs of glamor (the __DRiimage v6 bits were missing from previous patches, and glamor would need them, so he added them) and Prime on Wayland.
    Yes, but why merging ONE distro specific patches?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drago View Post
    Yes, but why merging ONE distro specific patches?
    I think you failed at reading there.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drago View Post
    Yes, but why merging ONE distro specific patches?
    If I read the post your quoting correctly, its saying that these patches [B]do[B] contain work that is useful for more than just MIR, and parts of Wayland in this case as well.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    82

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zeealpal View Post
    If I read the post your quoting correctly, its saying that these patches [B]do[B] contain work that is useful for more than just MIR, and parts of Wayland in this case as well.
    Not to mention that there is no Mir dependant code in these patches, ie no mir egl platform.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    945

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pdffs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Drago
    Yes, but why merging ONE distro specific patches?
    I think you failed at reading there.
    But succeeded in trolling! Yey!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    447

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pdffs View Post
    I think you failed at reading there.
    I think blind hate clouded his neurons to the point he can't even read.

  9. #9

    Default The Mesa crew should reject the patches.

    There is nothing stopping Canonical from producing Mir. They want it, they can have at it.

    But Canonical is notorious for producing -~NOTHING~- for the community in return. So the community should not be charged with supporting Mir.

    Mir is Canonical's baby. Canonical and Canonical alone should support it.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by halfmanhalfamazing View Post
    There is nothing stopping Canonical from producing Mir. They want it, they can have at it.

    But Canonical is notorious for producing -~NOTHING~- for the community in return. So the community should not be charged with supporting Mir.

    Mir is Canonical's baby. Canonical and Canonical alone should support it.
    Have you even read the article? I will quote it for you:
    The patch-set is basically about supporting DRI Image 6/7 in the Gallium3D drivers.

    The drivers enable DRI Image 7 support for the Gallium3D drivers currently supporting DMA-BUF's import/export capabilities: Nouveau, LunarG's ILO Intel Gallium3D, and Radeon (R300, R600, and RadeonSI). There's also the necessary prep work to Gallium3D's driver-independent DRI and DRM winsys code.
    Additionally, the code can be beneficial to Wayland's PRIME support with DMA-BUF import/export handling and also DRI3.
    So these patches are actually beneficial for the community, which blows your whole argument right out of the water.

Posting Permissions

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