Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Intel GLAMOR Gains X-Video Support

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    70

    Default

    finally. Nautilus become a piece of nothing.
    something similar from dolphin can be great.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,668

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fritzls View Post
    finally. Nautilus become a piece of nothing.
    something similar from dolphin can be great.
    Wrong thread?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nanonyme View Post
    I'm not even sure if it'll end up being dramatically less optimal. A lot of current Glamor performance issues seem to be due to bugs or missing features. It will likely be reasonably fast when it's matured.
    I haven't said it's dramatically less optimal, just less optimal. It's very likely that it will be reasonably fast when it's matured, but my point is that I don't see the point on using GLAMOR in the Intel DDX having SNA available.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    770

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    Thanks for the clarification. I was under the misunderstanding (guided by someone's post in another thread, in the one about Cairo's possible inclusion in the C++ standard, like a month ago) that Cairo only did software rendering.
    Nope... it's got a number of rendering backends, including X, various image formats, postscript and PDF... and OpenGL.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    70

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nanonyme View Post
    Wrong thread?
    Yeap. post from phone..
    sorry

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    I haven't said it's dramatically less optimal, just less optimal. It's very likely that it will be reasonably fast when it's matured, but my point is that I don't see the point on using GLAMOR in the Intel DDX having SNA available.
    Xorg as a wayland client needs GLAMOR to work. That's the point.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zxy_thf View Post
    Xorg as a wayland client needs GLAMOR to work. That's the point.
    Can't it use SNA? The only reason I can think of to not be able to use SNA is to not be able to use real DDX drivers, and in that case it is not really important to have GLAMOR support in the Intel DDX. Could you explain further, please?

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    Can't it use SNA? The only reason I can think of to not be able to use SNA is to not be able to use real DDX drivers, and in that case it is not really important to have GLAMOR support in the Intel DDX. Could you explain further, please?
    Hmm you're right. I believe it's possible to use SNA as a wayland client technically.
    I'm guessing Intel favors GLAMOR over SNA because this architecture (Wayland-Xorg-GLAMOR-OpenGL) has less duplicated code (compared with Wayland-Xorg-DDX-OpenGL).

    As a circumstantial evidence AMD also uses GLAMOR instead of ddx from scratch on radeonsi.

Posting Permissions

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