DRI2 status
Kristian Høgsberg
krh at bitplanet.net
Mon Feb 25 12:02:22 PST 2008
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Tiago Vignatti <vignatti at c3sl.ufpr.br> wrote:
> Jerome Glisse escreveu:
...
> > Yes please put DRI2 in separate files so i can import them in
> > gallium without having to mess with older dri interface sitting
> > in gallium right now
>
> Also, with DRI2 we have to explicit pass --disable-dri2 flag to autoconf
> because Xorg uses dri_sarea.h which is external to X server (from mesa).
> Is this good enough?
Nope, these are definitely problems that need to be fixed. Please
file bugs, and assign to me, otherwise I'll just forget. I got sucked
into a Red Hat black hole shortly after committing the first DRI2
patches, and had to leave them upstream in a rather rough state. Bad
timing, but I'm working fixing this stuff now.
I recently merged the intel_context.c files for i915 and i965 in mesa,
which should add DRI2 for i965, but I'm still testing that. The
roadmap to getting DRI2 into a state where we can enable it by default
includes:
- Implement DRI2 protocol so direct rendering can work. Includes a
DRI2 protocol module, protocol code in the DRI2 module in the X server
and protocol code in libGL.
- Implement DRI2 support in libGL. I want to do this more like how
AIGLX works, with a vtable of GLX functions that the glX* functions
can call into. There will then be a vtable for indirect, XF86DRI and
DRI2.
- There's problems with resizing redirected direct rendering windows.
- Get the xf86-video-intel intel-batchbuffer branch up to decent
performance and merge to master. Not sure what state this is in at
this point, but I merged Eric's intel-batchbuffer branch from his repo
to the main repo, so all this work is now at least in the same branch.
Kristian
More information about the xorg
mailing list