On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:20:13PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:03:06PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > So has this been benchmarked - intuitively I'd agree and expect that a
> > shadowfb driver ought to give best performance.
>
> No, but it's noticably nicer to use under
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:20:13PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:03:06PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > So has this been benchmarked - intuitively I'd agree and expect that a
> > shadowfb driver ought to give best performance.
>
> No, but it's noticably nicer to use under
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:03:06PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> So has this been benchmarked - intuitively I'd agree and expect that a
> shadowfb driver ought to give best performance.
No, but it's noticably nicer to use under virt-manager. I'll try to come
up with some numbers.
> > +/* Map the fram
So has this been benchmarked - intuitively I'd agree and expect that a
shadowfb driver ought to give best performance.
> +/* Map the framebuffer from the card and configure the core */
> +static int cirrus_vram_init(struct cirrus_device *cdev)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + /* BAR 0 is VRAM */
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> qemu-kvm emulates a Cirrus GPU, including its acceleration engine. We
> typically then run a Cirrus-specific X driver on top of this, which
> turns requests into commands and sends them to the emulated accelerator.
> This all seems to be un
qemu-kvm emulates a Cirrus GPU, including its acceleration engine. We
typically then run a Cirrus-specific X driver on top of this, which
turns requests into commands and sends them to the emulated accelerator.
This all seems to be unnecessary overhead given that we're just going
to end up writing
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:03:06PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> So has this been benchmarked - intuitively I'd agree and expect that a
> shadowfb driver ought to give best performance.
No, but it's noticably nicer to use under virt-manager. I'll try to come
up with some numbers.
> > +/* Map the fram
So has this been benchmarked - intuitively I'd agree and expect that a
shadowfb driver ought to give best performance.
> +/* Map the framebuffer from the card and configure the core */
> +static int cirrus_vram_init(struct cirrus_device *cdev)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + /* BAR 0 is VRAM */
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> qemu-kvm emulates a Cirrus GPU, including its acceleration engine. We
> typically then run a Cirrus-specific X driver on top of this, which
> turns requests into commands and sends them to the emulated accelerator.
> This all seems to be un
qemu-kvm emulates a Cirrus GPU, including its acceleration engine. We
typically then run a Cirrus-specific X driver on top of this, which
turns requests into commands and sends them to the emulated accelerator.
This all seems to be unnecessary overhead given that we're just going
to end up writing
10 matches
Mail list logo