Re: Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-13 Thread Pekka Paalanen
On Fri, 13 Jun 2014 07:47:54 -0400 Rob Clark wrote: > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 7:04 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 14:06:33 +0300 > > Pekka Paalanen wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:00:04 +0200 > >> Benjamin Gaignard wrote: > >> > >> > On my hardware the patches you have

Re: Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-13 Thread Rob Clark
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 7:04 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 14:06:33 +0300 > Pekka Paalanen wrote: > >> On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:00:04 +0200 >> Benjamin Gaignard wrote: >> >> > On my hardware the patches you have (+ this one on gstwaylandsink >> > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug

Re: Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-13 Thread Pekka Paalanen
On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 14:06:33 +0300 Pekka Paalanen wrote: > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:00:04 +0200 > Benjamin Gaignard wrote: > > > On my hardware the patches you have (+ this one on gstwaylandsink > > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=711155) allow me to do zero > > copy between the hardware

Re: Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-12 Thread Rob Clark
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 2:01 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 12:00:57 -0400 > Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Pekka Paalanen >> wrote: >> > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 12:23:18 +0100 >> > Daniel Stone wrote: >> > >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> On 9 June 2014 12:06, Pekka Paa

Re: Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-12 Thread Rob Clark
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 2:26 AM, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > On 06/09/2014 01:23 PM, Daniel Stone wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 9 June 2014 12:06, Pekka Paalanen > > wrote: >> >> On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:00:04 +0200 >> Benjamin Gaignard >

Re: Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-11 Thread Pekka Paalanen
On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 12:00:57 -0400 Rob Clark wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Pekka Paalanen > wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 12:23:18 +0100 > > Daniel Stone wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> On 9 June 2014 12:06, Pekka Paalanen > >> wrote: > >> > >> > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:00:04 +0200 > >

Re: Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-11 Thread Rob Clark
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 12:23:18 +0100 > Daniel Stone wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On 9 June 2014 12:06, Pekka Paalanen wrote: >> >> > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:00:04 +0200 >> > Benjamin Gaignard wrote: >> > > One of the main comment on the latest patches

Re: Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-10 Thread Thomas Hellstrom
On 06/09/2014 01:23 PM, Daniel Stone wrote: > Hi, > > On 9 June 2014 12:06, Pekka Paalanen > wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:00:04 +0200 > Benjamin Gaignard > wrote: > > One of the main comment on the lat

Re: Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-09 Thread Thomas Daede
Why does the kernel need to be the arbiter for buffer content constraints? Instead, can't the client program query each hardware device for its capabilities and then settle on a buffer format in common itself? That said, I am writing a kernel driver for a video decoder and was looking for ways to

Re: Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-09 Thread Pekka Paalanen
On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 12:23:18 +0100 Daniel Stone wrote: > Hi, > > On 9 June 2014 12:06, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > > > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:00:04 +0200 > > Benjamin Gaignard wrote: > > > One of the main comment on the latest patches was that wl_dmabuf use > > > DRM for buffer allocation. > > > Th

Re: Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-09 Thread Daniel Stone
Hi, On 9 June 2014 12:06, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:00:04 +0200 > Benjamin Gaignard wrote: > > One of the main comment on the latest patches was that wl_dmabuf use > > DRM for buffer allocation. > > This appear to be an issue since wayland doesn't want to rely on one > > spe

Re: Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-09 Thread Pekka Paalanen
On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:00:04 +0200 Benjamin Gaignard wrote: > Hi, > > We are still interested in this topic too. Hey, cool. :-) > One of the main comment on the latest patches was that wl_dmabuf use > DRM for buffer allocation. > This appear to be an issue since wayland doesn't want to rely on

Re: Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-09 Thread Benjamin Gaignard
Hi, We are still interested in this topic too. One of the main comment on the latest patches was that wl_dmabuf use DRM for buffer allocation. This appear to be an issue since wayland doesn't want to rely on one specific framework (DRM, or V4L2) for buffer allocation, so we have start working on

Wayland generic dmabuf protocol

2014-06-09 Thread Pekka Paalanen
Hi, the previous attempt at introducing a generic wl_dmabuf protocol to Wayland didn't end too well: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2013-December/012390.html http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2013-December/012455.html http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/way