Hi On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 9:08 PM Kim, Dongwon <dongwon....@intel.com> wrote:
> > "hotplug" functionality where a Guest display/window is deeply tied > to a > > physical monitor to make it appear to the guest that it is dealing > with > > a real physical monitor. > > > > In other words, when the physical monitor is unplugged, the > associated > > guest display/window gets destroyed/hidden and gets recreated/shown > > when > > the monitor is hotplugged again. > > > > > > Interesting case that could be added to virt-viewer if it's necessary. > > > > The subject is sufficiently complex that there is already additional > > documentation/specification in: > > > https://gitlab.com/virt-viewer/virt-viewer/-/tree/master/docs?ref_type=heads > < > https://gitlab.com/virt-viewer/virt-viewer/-/tree/master/docs?ref_type=heads > > > > > > Honestly, I don't support the idea of duplicating this effort in QEMU. > > Marc-André, > > My assumption is virt-viewer might not be able to completely replace > GTK-UI path in terms of performance and smoothness of display update as > (I think) frame copy between processes is implied, which is same as > There is no frame copy when using DMABUF scanouts between qemu and client. Iow, the performance difference is negligible / noise level. spice-remote viewer. What about display-bus that you have been working > on? Would it be a good alternative w.r.t perf concern that I specified > above? > There shouldn't be much difference for the local DMABUF display case. > > > > > -- > > Marc-André Lureau > > -- Marc-André Lureau
