Keith Whitwell wrote:
> > I suppose I'm basing my assumptions on sarea usage that is not there right
> > now (a private sarea per context system rather than the temporary copies
> > which we have now), and assuming a full featured t&l card will have
> > somewhere around 4-16k of possible state.
First, sorry for the double post, Yahoo mail said that
the first send failed(odd...), anyway,
I don't see why not using HW T&L would cause such a
drastic difference in performance. (Esp, since this
was on a highly clocked CPU - 1.33Ghz, I also tried
disabling HyperZ and associated features, but,
> The Radeon 7200 DRI drivers work, but performance is a
> problem. I get roughly 1/2 to 1/3 the performance in
> linux than in windows. I've tried quake3 and unreal
> tournament. In Windows I get about 100fps in UT, as
> opposed to 40 or so in Linux. (Quake3 was even
> worse...) Linux glxgears o
(Resend)
I've found 2 issues w/ the Radeon 7200 in Linux.
The first, I've seen with several other Radeons - 64mb
DDR, 32mb DDR, 64mb SDR. In the left hand side of the
screen, the mouse cursor will be extremely jumpy(or
just not update on movement at all), I've found that
setting sw_cursor fixes
There are 2 problems here:
With the current radeon driver the mouse is extremely
jumpy, or does not register movement at all when in
the left hand side of the screen. I've found that
setting Option sw_cursor, causes things to run
smoothly again.
With the current Radeon driver, I'm getting a
subs
Is the drm interface applicable to 2d accelerator cards? This is because
i dont have a supported 3d card.
___
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
>
> LT> Now, we already have one case where this broke, which is why we
> probably
> LT> should have a major version number too, which indicates that things
> start
> LT> from a clean slate. So the old 4.0.x DRM should be called version
> 0.0, and
> LT> the new 4.1 DRM should be called 1.0.
> LT>
On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 09:44:15PM +0200, Dieter N?tzel wrote:
> Hello Andrew,
>
> very nice work!
> But can you please redo your patch against the real Mesa-3.5 CVS tree and not
> yours?
>
> src/X86/3dnow_xform3.S
> src/X86/3dnow_xform4.S
> fail.
>
> As I "see" that you are very good x86 asm
Keith Whitwell wrote:
>
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 07:00, Jens Owen wrote:
> > Keith,
> >
> > Thanks for addressing this issue. I think it's an important area to our
> > success. I do have a few questions. They are inline below.
> >
> > Keith Whitwell wrote:
> > > Jeff, Others,
> > >
> > > I've bee
Hello Andrew,
very nice work!
But can you please redo your patch against the real Mesa-3.5 CVS tree and not
yours?
src/X86/3dnow_xform3.S
src/X86/3dnow_xform4.S
fail.
As I "see" that you are very good x86 asm hacker and I am not (I learned asm
on 6502 and 68k) what do you think about working
> Actually it doesn't acheive anything. There's no pretending that you don't
... There's no use pretending...
> have ioctls that you really do - that's all a versioning scheme can
> acheieve (ignoring the sarea snafu, of course).
Keith
___
> I suppose I'm basing my assumptions on sarea usage that is not there right
> now (a private sarea per context system rather than the temporary copies
> which we have now), and assuming a full featured t&l card will have
> somewhere around 4-16k of possible state. (WARNING: The following is
> s
On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 11:36, Daryll Strauss wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 10:14:33AM -0600, jhartmann wrote:
> > If you have demenstrated that this is the case then we should remove the
> > version system then I guess. I do want to voice my concerns though by
> > writing out my argument fully th
On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 10:14:33AM -0600, jhartmann wrote:
> If you have demenstrated that this is the case then we should remove the version
> system then I guess. I do want to voice my concerns though by writing out my
> argument fully though.
Having a version system is safer. If something doe
Michael,
I need a refresher, what are you trying to do again? Seems from
this information that you are just trying to get the bt848 data
to the Overlay without using up too much cpu? If that is the case
then you should be using the video4linux interface. Xawtv does this,
and I watch TV on my i81
Keith Whitwell wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Oct 2001 22:39, jhartmann wrote:
> > Keith Whitwell wrote:
> > > Jeff, Others,
> > >
> > > I've been reviewing the work in the 3.5 branch for backwards
> > > compatibility and to me it looks like we can do it with a lot less
> > > effort. Here's what I'm propos
I am using the latest CVS and I am trying to open to stereo VE using
Maverik.The problem is that the textures can be displayed only in one of
the windows.Can anyone please advise?
Thanks.
___
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://li
On Sun, 14 Oct 2001 22:39, jhartmann wrote:
> Keith Whitwell wrote:
> > Jeff, Others,
> >
> > I've been reviewing the work in the 3.5 branch for backwards
> > compatibility and to me it looks like we can do it with a lot less
> > effort. Here's what I'm proposing, in one simple sentence:
> >
> >
18 matches
Mail list logo
