<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Dave Airlie <<a href="mailto:airlied@redhat.com">airlied@redhat.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div class="im">On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 09:49 +0800, Joel Feiner wrote: > 2009/8/4 Michel Dänzer <<a href="mailto:michel@daenzer.net">michel@daenzer.net</a>> > <snip> > > I wonder if maybe the slowdown I'm seeing is because the > radeon driver > is temporarily lacking UploadToScreen and DownloadFromScreen > hooks with > KMS, though I'm not sure what those would be used for with > text > rendering. > > Off-topic, but if I may enquire out of intellectual curiosity: why > doesn't the KMS version of Radeon have UTS and DFS acceleration? </div>The code is in the branch, but its really ugly, I was hoping to actual do it cleaner which might involve a new kernel interface to ask for the current placement of a buffer object so we can decide whether to just memcpy or we need to blit for DFS. I'm not sure I saw a good reason for UTS, doing Host data blits isn't really useful with BOs at least with the current code. Dave. </blockquote><div>Which branch? And does it work? I'm wondering if it might be worth trying if only to see if it solves my KMS slowness bug (<a href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23085">https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23085</a>) -- that's the selfish reason for my question ;). And I'm sorry for my lack of knowledge on the subject, but why would UTS be unnecessary? Is all 2d rendering done in such a way that it can be done in video memory? Or perhaps I am misunderstanding what UTS and DFS actually do. </div></div>