On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 4:39 PM Mathias Fröhlich <mathias.froehl...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Hi, > > On Tuesday, 23 April 2019 22:23:45 CEST Marek Olšák wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 4:05 PM Mathias Fröhlich < > mathias.froehl...@gmx.net> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Marek, > > > > > > On Tuesday, 23 April 2019 20:22:15 CEST Marek Olšák wrote: > > > > I'd like to remove swrast from devices. It doesn't work > (eglInitialize > > > > fails) and I don't think I like swrast there. Any objections? > > > > > > Yes, how do you guarantee that at least one device can be returned > > > in any case? Even if no drm device is found? > > > The egl device query extension guarantees that there is at least one > > > device available. > > > Beside that swrast may make sense for itself, that is the reason > > > the swrast device is there. > > > > > > > If no device can be returned, the extension won't be exposed. > Yes, I was triggering this solution back in the days. There was (is?) no > infrastructure to enable > or disable an egl extension just past initialization or at runtime. > Finally Emil took the route to add swrast. > > The longer I saw the swrast device the better It appeared to me. > ... from the users point of view. > > > OR > > If there is at least 1 drm device, swrast won't be in the list. > > > > From my perspective, radeonsi is always in the list and I wouldn't like > > swrast to be in the list if radeonsi is in the list. > > I see - at least I think. But really the swrast device is good as is. I > see plenty use cases for that. > Having that only present when there is no hardware device makes it less > useful. > How is swrast good? How is swrast useful if you have a supported GPU? Marek
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
