Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Firefox Is Seeing Work On Wayland VA-API Video Acceleration

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by frank007 View Post
    Opera (browser), why, why, whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!
    You know that browser got sold to a chinese search engine or something right? So they're not going to be much different than Google, especially with using Blink as the engine under the hood.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by Hibbelharry View Post

      Thats not the whole answer. Sure Mozilla gets most of it's money currently from google, but they're trying to generate other income, by for example starting to offer kind of VPN services. And Google and Mozilla aren't controlled by the same people, so they might cut their relation when they're in need. So Google might partially control Mozilla currently, but not to absolute degree.
      And Google has full control over the video codec used by Youtube.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by frank007 View Post
        And Google has full control over the video codec used by Youtube.
        Context?

        Sure, googles does have control over the video codec, since youtube is a google company. But Youtube is switching to mostly open codecs and royalty free codecs like AV1, so whats the matter here?

        Mostly no hardware accelerates AV1 today, but many other codecs started just the same, it took a while, and then there was decoding acceleration in hardware. There is no reason that acceleration can't be offered via VA-API, so everything is going into the right direction currently.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by polarathene View Post

          You know that browser got sold to a chinese search engine or something right? So they're not going to be much different than Google, especially with using Blink as the engine under the hood.
          It's even worse. It's that company that already killed startcom (starttls) and other companies and services. Nowadays opera is mostly financed by offering predatory loans. Opera isn't a browser company anymore, it's a loan company owning a browser as a sidekick. And on a global scale, they're loosing browser marketshare rapidly.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by ms178 View Post
            Chromium should take notice, although some distributions ship their build with VA-API patches already. Hardware video acceleration is a big deal, especially on laptops.
            Event with this patch, va-api acceleration can't work on wayland unfortunately.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by Britoid View Post

              Wayland lets you avoid copying pixels around and works on the concept of shared buffers. Firefox can set the hardware decoder to use a shared buffer that's also shared with the compositor.

              This isn't really possible under X, Firefox would have to start copying pixels everywhere which is terrible for performance and battery life reasons.
              and this works with chromium... same old story, Ubuntu don't go with Wayland because nvidia non free drivers and gaming but someone remembers to put work in something only for wayland

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by Hibbelharry View Post

                Thats not the whole answer. Sure Mozilla gets most of it's money currently from google, but they're trying to generate other income, by for example starting to offer kind of VPN services. And Google and Mozilla aren't controlled by the same people, so they might cut their relation when they're in need. So Google might partially control Mozilla currently, but not to absolute degree.
                As always, it is complicated. Mozilla's income (from Google) depends on Google receiving ad revenue from Firefox searches. Mozilla has to walk a fine line between maintaining the ad revenue for Google in order to maintain its revenue stream. If Mozilla goes too far Google ad revenue from Firefox would likely drop, and then Mozilla income would drop, and then Mozilla would need to fire even more staff to survive (perhaps stop paying their CEO $2M/yr?). So, finding alternative income streams for Mozilla is necessary, but creating services to replace $400M/yr is not going to be easy, and so Mozilla will continue to make compromises in order to not be an ex-Mozilla.

                Comment


                • #28
                  I have a few related questions and observations:

                  1. Without DMA-buf, it was said that there's no way to implement vaapi? I thought the xserver used Xv as a way to target a window with a video (and scale/convert colorpace as needed). It's not zero copy, but it still works and has worked for years (despite needing to copy every frame in ram to it's destination). Though its useful for efficiency, I don't see how DMA-buf is |absolutely| necessary for hardware video accel.

                  2. I don't think Mozilla's experimental servo project is supposed to be "the next Firefox" they use it as a test bed for new features and if those features work (like webrender, quantum, etc) it gets ported to Firefox and further maintained in the Firefox tree. At least, that's my understanding.

                  3. I personally don't like Google's chrome being the only other browser (and the browser that most users use.) It gives Google way too much power over the future of the internet. But at the same time, if you look at websites as using an API that your browser implements to show websites or perform cloud services, then it kinda makes sense to use software from the same company that has the most influence in what this API looks like. If that makes any sense. Plus, you can always fork chromium and make any changes you want. Personally, I usually run the underdog (yes, I have a history of using MSN.com...then bing.com for my searches... some very dark days those were. But I got help I needed and was shown the way of the Google.) I simply use Firefox because I don't like Google's hands being in everything from the browser to the server (in some cases). That felt like more of a rant than a comment or question, so I'll leave it here.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    A mainstream browser with upstreamed wayland and hardware decode is a big wayland milestone. Chromium has good decode support at least for intel (I've been using it for more than a year without a single problem) and wayland support is apparently not too far away, but Chromium it seems will never upstream the linux hardware decoding.

                    I thought firefox was a long way from hardware decode because I thought it depended on webrender migration being finished. I hope it works with kwin.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by Hibbelharry View Post

                      Context?

                      Sure, googles does have control over the video codec, since youtube is a google company. But Youtube is switching to mostly open codecs and royalty free codecs like AV1, so whats the matter here?

                      Mostly no hardware accelerates AV1 today, but many other codecs started just the same, it took a while, and then there was decoding acceleration in hardware. There is no reason that acceleration can't be offered via VA-API, so everything is going into the right direction currently.
                      The only direction we all can take. PERIOD

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X