Damage as a DIX notion

[Michel Dänzer]

On 26/09/16 12:01 PM, Keith Packard wrote:
> Michel Dänzer <michel at daenzer.net> writes:
> 
>> And it should be relatively easy to get that with the existing damage
>> code. Since glamor is only interested in the damage region extents, it
>> can set a DamageReportFunc which drops everything but the extents of the
>> current operation, something like (based on a function used by the
>> amdgpu/radeon drivers):
> 
> We're actually thinking of getting rid of the wrappers for damage and
> doing them in DIX instead.

Right, but I'm questioning if any gains from that vs using and possibly
tweaking the current damage code (what would the expected gains be?) are
enough to justify the churn.


>> (Such a new damageLevel might even be interesting for compositors as
>> well)
> 
> DamageReportBoundingBox provides something like this.

Not really, at least not as currently implemented:
DamageReportBoundingBox only reports new damage when the extents change,
but it still records the fully accurate damage region, which can incur
significant overhead as the region grows rects.


-- 
Earthling Michel Dänzer               |               http://www.amd.com
Libre software enthusiast             |             Mesa and X developer

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 163 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/attachments/20160926/4f5dab10/attachment.sig>