Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Vulkan Extension Proposed For DirectFB Support

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

  • #11
    Originally posted by ddriver View Post
    If Vulkan runs on top of DirectFB, then the latter should facilitate the former, not the other way around.

    The code that is needed to run vk on top of dfb should be part of dfb, there is no need to bloat vk on the off chance someone decides to use dfb.
    Are you aware that the Vulkan spec already has specific Window System Integration extensions for each platform it works on?

    Currently it has:
    1. Android: VK_KHR_android_surface
    2. Wayland: VK_KHR_wayland_surface
    3. MS Windows:
      VK_KHR_win32_surface
      VK_KHR_external_memory_win32
      VK_KHR_win32_keyed_mutex
      VK_KHR_external_semaphore_win32
      VK_KHR_external_fence_win32
    4. X11 with XCB: VK_KHR_xcb_surface
    5. X11 with Xlib: VK_KHR_xlib_surface

    Comment


    • #12
      I think ddriver is trying to say that DirectFB is a software API on top of the legacy framebuffer code. It would be better facilitated by rewriting it to be on top of VK_KHR_display so it makes better use of the hardware. The article proposal is asking to be able to do something really pointless, especially if you have vulkan available on the hardware. If you’re insistent on the final output being through directfb, you could do the same thing by reading back from the vulkan render target.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by ddriver View Post
        No thanks, if professional experience has taught me anything, it is to not waste energy on people, stuck in their ways.
        Then, why would you even told us? Just have your opinion received? Is it not also waste of time? When I see problems, I go to the places there they "might" be fixed. Ah, maybe, you posted it to extend your opinion by comments of others. So, here is my comment: I personally thing: Why not to have another extension that I will not use, but others do. The only point for Khronos, I guess, would be maintenance burden of the new extension as Vulkan should be highly stable and reliable. It seems to me that this maintenance burden is what you was pointing at. Anyway, it is responsibility of Khronos to decide. If they refuse, it might finish as you suggested, being only part of DirectFB (?).

        Comment

        Working...
        X