On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 20 October 2015 at 17:40, Arnaud Vrac <raw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 20 October 2015 at 17:06, Julien Isorce <julien.iso...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 19 October 2015 at 17:16, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On 17 October 2015 at 00:14, Julien Isorce <julien.iso...@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > This patch allows to use gallium vaapi without requiring
> >> >> > a X server running for your second graphic card.
> >> >> >
> >> >> I've sent a lengthy series which should mitigate the need of some
> >> >> hunks.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Ok I'll wait for your patches to land before going further on this
> >> > patch.
> >> > Should I expect vl_winsy_drm.c in your patches ? Not sure do
> understood
> >> > that
> >> > part. Actually I though about having "vl_screen_create_drm" and
> renames
> >> > vl_screen_create to vl_screen_create_x11 (because it takes XDisplay in
> >> > params) but then I got confused because vl_winsys.h includes Xlib.h.
> >> > Should
> >> > future vl_screen_create_drm be in another header, vl_drm.h ?
> >> >
> >> My series flattens the if GALLIUM_STATIC_TARGETS spaghetti. Although
> >> it's more of a FYI rather than "wait until they land".
> >>
> >> On the winsys_dri vs winsys_drm side - I'm not planning to do any work
> >> there, neither I did notice the Xlib.h dependency in vl_winsys.h.
> >>
> >> What I'm pondering is about having a 'proper' drm backend, although
> >> admittedly I haven't looked exactly what libva{-intel-driver,}'s
> >> definition of that is. I'd assume that moving the non-winsys specifics
> >> (from vl_winsys_dri.c) to vl_winsys.h and adding a
> >> vl_screen_texture_from_drawable() equivalent for drm (amongst others).
> >> As you can tell much of this is guesswork, so if you don't have the
> >> time and others are happy with the approach as is, feel free to
> >> ignore.
> >
> >
> > A wayland backend would be nice too.
> I'm afraid not many of us have the time and/or interest to work on
> that. Patches implementing it will be kindly accepted :-)
>
> > Right now vainfo under wayland just
> > crashes.
> >
> I guess we can separate the VA_DISPLAY_foo switch statement into a
> separate patch which can also go into stable. Personally I don't mind
> either way.
>
Julien added the VA_DISPLAY_WAYLAND in the switch in the latest patches, so
at least an error is now returned instead of crashing.
--
Arnaud
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
