RandR 1.2 feedback

[Keith Packard]

On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 13:58 -0800, Andy Ritger wrote:
> Thanks, Keith.  Fair enough.
> 
> I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on some of these points.
> 
> I think the RandR 1.2 spec is workable as-is, so I'll just plan on going
> with that.  I'll look at wiring up the NVIDIA driver to RandR 1.2.

Cool. We're busy making the RandR 1.2 support shared between Intel and
Radeon drivers and then moving that to the common layer; let me know if
you're interested in working with that code, it will also support
startup configuration through the config file and will work with older X
servers that do not have RandR 1.2 support.

> However, note that NVIDIA's OpenGL implementation works fine within
> Xinerama today.  I don't believe the current Xinerama implementation in
> the X server precludes direct rendering OpenGL.  Any problems we've had
> implementing OpenGL within the current Xinerama implementation have
> really been problems with our OpenGL implementation, rather than problems
> interacting with the Xinerama implementation.

I have to support heterogeneous GPU environments, which the current
implementation precludes. For homogenous GPU systems, things are much
easier...

> Anyway, it sounds like there is a lot of interesting stuff to discuss
> wrt the Xinerama implementation and how to either replace or improve that.
> I'll leave the topic alone for now so we can focus on RandR 1.2.

Sounds like we're go for launch then; I'll finish up the DIX
implemetation and look forward to seeing it work on your video cards
soon.

Thanks for your help; nice to know we aren't locking anyone out of
important card features yet.

-- 
keith.packard at intel.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20061129/920f847d/attachment.pgp>