Fence Sync patches

Owen Taylor 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

- Owen

(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 mailing list