On 18/11/14 18:36, Henri Verbeet wrote: > On 17 November 2014 21:05, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote: >> - GL extensions >> I feel that it's a bit too much to shoot the project down, because it >> does not introduce GL extensions that will be useful. > To clarify, that's not what I said. It's mostly just that I'd like to > see some actual evidence for the (implicit) claim that the performance > difference is largely due to inherent OpenGL API overhead. > An earlier link shows quite a few games that have noticeable perf impact. Feel free to grab anyone and do some analysis that you'd consider most appropriate. I fear I won't be able to help you out there :(
>> Considering the interface note able, would you say that any new >> implementation towards handling D3D9 in wine is acceptable ? > If anything, it would have to be an interface approximately on the > level of the DDI, like Jose mentioned. > This is a very nice first step. Thank you. From a quick look at MSDN it seems to me that going the DDI (like) route would require substantial rework on the wine side. How much contribution from wine can we expect ? Would you have the chance to help with design/coding, or would you be (no disrespect here) limited to answering questions ? >> Can we work together so that both project benefit from this effort ? > I like to think we've always had good relations with Mesa, even if we > don't always agree on everything. > I'm sure that not everything in mesa is perfect yet I've not seen (m)any bug reports from you guys. If/when you guys spot something broken/extremely slow please bugzilla it or send an email to the ML. Good relations are based on mutual feedback :) Speaking of feedback, please consider using GLX_MESA_query_renderer. It should help you (at least a bit) with the massive vendor/device/video_memory tables that you currently have. Thanks Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
