Daniel Stone <[email protected]> writes: > Hey Kristian, > > On 13 March 2017 at 17:31, Kristian H. Kristensen <[email protected]> wrote: >> Jason Ekstrand <[email protected]> writes: >>> I was talking to Daniel today and I think we also need another some sort of >>> GL or GBM api that gives you the modifiers supported for >>> rendering/texturing. One option would be a gbm_get_modifiers_for_use() >>> entrypoint that takes a usage and gives you a set of modifiers that's >>> guaranteed to work for that usage. For scanout, it would return LINEAR, X, >>> and Y on SKL+ and LINEAR and X on BDW-; it wouldn't return CCS because that >>> only works on a limited number of planes. I say this now because we may >>> want to do that with the same DRI version bump as the rest of it. >> >> Are you aware of >> >> https://www.khronos.org/registry/EGL/extensions/EXT/EGL_EXT_image_dma_buf_import_modifiers.txt >> >> If you talked to Daniel, he probably brought it up - what's missing? > > I guess it depends on how much asymmetry there is between texture and > render formats ... if there isn't much, then we could focus on landing > Varad's work and use that as a jumping-off point. I was under the > impression that there was a pretty big difference for some hardware, > though I guess the GBM implementation would still rank by optimality > when allocating ...
Right, but if it's more complicated than what EGL_EXT_image_dma_buf_import_modifiers exposes, do really we want to that logic into gbm? Kristian _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
