On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 09:39:24AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 02:35:07PM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-07-06 at 11:12 +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > > cirrus can handle 1024x768 (and slightly higher) with 24bpp depth.
> > > cirrus can handle up to 800x600 w
On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 02:35:07PM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-07-06 at 11:12 +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > cirrus can handle 1024x768 (and slightly higher) with 24bpp depth.
> > cirrus can handle up to 800x600 with 32bpp.
>
> 16bpp is maybe a better choice? Nobody's using cirrus b
On Fri, 2018-07-06 at 11:12 +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> cirrus can handle 1024x768 (and slightly higher) with 24bpp depth.
> cirrus can handle up to 800x600 with 32bpp.
16bpp is maybe a better choice? Nobody's using cirrus because they care
about color fidelity and it'll use less CPU to update.
cirrus can handle 1024x768 (and slightly higher) with 24bpp depth.
cirrus can handle up to 800x600 with 32bpp.
The problem with 24bpp is that it is a rather unusual depth these days,
cirrus is pretty much the only relevant device still using that, and it
is a endless source of issues. Wayland doe
