On Don, 2014-01-16 at 08:51 -0800, Eric Anholt wrote: > Michel Dänzer <[email protected]> writes: > > > On Fre, 2014-01-10 at 09:26 +0800, Eric Anholt wrote: > >> We're going to want to make this DIX code instead of XF86 if at all > >> possible, but for now just disable it so we can work on the rest of > >> the build. > > > > The radeon driver can't really use the in-tree glamor unless it supports > > Xv. What's your plan for phasing out the standalone glamor in favour of > > the in-tree one? > > There's a later set of patches for building the xf86 module and turning > on the current XV code. (I still want to rewrite the XV to be dix, > which I think involves pulling down the current two identical DDX > implementations to mi so that I don't have to write yet annother one). > > If in-tree glamor isn't better than external glamor by 1.16, the > something has gone horribly wrong.
Sounds great, thanks for the clarification. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
