On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:32:45 PM Axel Davy wrote: > In the case of XWayland, there's no accelerated indirect rendering. > For example GLX_ARB_create_context is not advertised by the server, > and according to the spec, we are not allowed to advertise it > to the application because of that. > > This env var makes Mesa ignore this restriction, and > a GLX extension is advertised whenever the client supports it. > > Signed-off-by: Axel Davy <axel.d...@ens.fr> > --- > src/glx/glxextensions.c | 9 ++++++++- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
In this specific case, I think it might make sense to just advertise the extension and return a GLX error if asked for indirect rendering. Or, just lie and return a direct rendering context. That would make the common case that most people want (GLX_ARB_create_context for direct rendered 3.2+ core profile stuff) work out of the box, without the need for environment variables. It's technically out of spec, but for X on Wayland, I think it's not unreasonable. On the other hand, supporting AIGLX of sorts might be possible... With XWayland, there are really a couple layers to "indirect" rendering... 1. Doing it X client side (direct rendering) 2. Doing it in the XWayland X11 server/Wayland client (semi-indirect). 3. Doing it wherever Weston/etc are running (total indirect). It seems like XWayland could support AIGLX with model #2 - X clients would speak GLX protocol to XWayland, which could then do the GL. Model #3 seems like something we should avoid at all costs. Of course, I don't know that there's any *benefit* to supporting AIGLX in XWayland, so...my real suggestion is to just raise a GLX error or lie if asked to create an indirect context. --Ken
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
