On 09/07/2016 04:18 AM, Emil Velikov wrote:
Hi Mathias,
On 6 September 2016 at 18:32, Mathias Fröhlich
<mathias.froehl...@gmx.net> wrote:
** EGL_EXT_output_drm
Correction - the above should read: EGL_EXT_{device,output}_drm
*** Using/exposing the card or render node
- Extension is designed with EGL streams in mind (using the
primary/card node) while people expect to use to select the rendering
device.
- Elaborate on the spec and/or introduce EGL_EXT_output{,_drm}_render ?
*** Exposing EGL_EXT_output{,_drm}{,_render} on EGL implementations
supporting both SW and HW devices
- Elaborate on the spec(s), add new one for SW devices and/or error
type to distinguish between the current errors and SW devices
I do not care about anything built on top of EGL_EXT_output_base or
EGL_*_stream_*. From my point of view this is beside.
What I do care about is EGL_EXT_platform_device.
That's precisely what, where and why we want to clarify, correct the
spec or add a new one.
James, Daniel, can we hear your input on the following ?
The way I read the spec(s) EGL_EXT_device_drm can effectively be
either the card/primary or render node, while EGL_EXT_output_drm must
be the card one.
Can/should we restrict the former to render only, do you see any
implications that will bring ?
Or should we just roll out another spec for the "render only" case ?
I had assumed EGL_EXT_device_drm's queries refer to the card/primary,
and an additional extension could add a token to query the render node.
When we initially started drafting the extensions, render nodes were
just being introduced, and I considered adding them as a separate query
later, but we had no need to identify the render nodes, so I demurred.
If that interpretation sounds OK, we can add corresponding
clarifications to the specifications.
Thanks,
-James
Thanks
Emil
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
