Fence Sync patches
otaylor at redhat.com
Fri Dec 3 08:26:29 PST 2010
On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 09:40 -0800, James Jones wrote:
> As I mentioned early on, I really want to get the fence sync work in server
> 1.10. The server code was reviewed by Adam Jackson (thanks for sifting
> through all that) and various nvidians, but I still haven't received any
> external official reviewed-by for the proto updates it relies on, or for the lib
> code to exercise it. I've CC'd the suggested reviewers on the latest versions
> of the patches and here:
> -Alan and Adam, because you provided some early feedback on the proto specs
> but never responded to my updates based on said feedback.
> -Keith, because you're the maintainer of the damage subsystem, and there are
> some minor changes to the damage proto and lib.
> If these remaining pieces get reviewed, I can send out pull requests for
> everything immediately. I've had this code out for review in some form for
> about 3 months now, so it'd be pretty disappointing if it had to sit around
> waiting for another release cycle.
Hey, is there a good big picture overview of this somewhere?
As a compositing manager maintainer (Mutter, the GNOME 3 compositing
manager), I'm wondering what it means for me.
There's already a lot of magic voodoo dances around both Damage and
Texture-From-Pixmap, what extra incantations does this add to the
(I can understand each individual step of the magic voodoo dance, but
when I go away from the individual problems and come back 6 months
later, I have to work it all out again. And there's a strong sense that
only particular code paths that actually are in use are tested and
anything else probably doesn't work, at least on some drivers.)
More information about the xorg-devel