[Xorg] DRI merging

[Eric Anholt]

On Sat, 2004-06-12 at 08:40, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 16:44:43 +0200, Michel Dänzer <michel at daenzer.net> wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, 2004-06-11 at 23:17 -0700, Eric Anholt wrote:
> > > I would like to see a merge from DRI CVS to X.Org in the near future.
> > > Is there any opposition to this?
> > 
> > No opposition, but a concern: Where are we going to integrate the DRI
> > with the Composite extension, in the X.Org or DRI tree? I'd be in favour
> > of moving the DRI tree to a branch of the X.Org tree altogether, but I'd
> > like to hear what other people's current opinions are on this.
> 
> I agree.  While we are on the subject, there are also two big patches
> that ought to be merged at some point which could make the merge from
> the DRI somewhat more complicated.  The first is Ati's new radeon code
> drop (with revamped crtc handling, r4xx suppot, and render accel) and
> the second is the new intel DDX.  since the intel driver now supports
> multi-head and ryan's latest work removes the hallib requirements from
> the matrox driver, it might be a good time to decide how to proceed
> with mergedfb.  right now it's all DDX specific code, but most of it
> could be made generic, which would make it easier to support mergedfb
> in all the drivers that currently support dualhead (intel, matrox,
> sis, radeon, etc.).  Doing this may, however, affect compatibility
> with xfree86 unless they picked up the patches.

I'm working on the Render acceleration -- there were some conformance
issues in the ATI patch that I'm working on fixing, along with making it
more featureful.

-- 
Eric Anholt                                eta at lclark.edu          
http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/         anholt at FreeBSD.org