On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
>> - drm dma-buf prime support. Dave Airlie sent me the pull request but
>> didn't push very hard for it, it's in my "ok, I can still pull it for
>> 3.4 if individual DRM driver people te
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Florian Tobias Schandinat
wrote:
> On 09/17/2011 06:23 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>>
>>> Is it? Well, okay, I don't want to use any acceleration that can crash my
>>> machine, where can I select it, preferably as compile time option? I didn't
>>> find
>>> such a thin
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Florian Tobias Schandinat
wrote:
> On 09/15/2011 06:58 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>>> Well, I rather think that the fb API is more user centric to allow every
>>> program
>>> to use it directly in contrast to the KMS/DRM API which aims to support
>>> every
>>> feature t
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 19:52, Alex Deucher wrote:
>> While the DRM has historically targeted 3D acceleration, that is not a
>> requirement to use the DRM KMS modesetting API. The current fb API
>> has
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Florian Tobias Schandinat
wrote:
> On 09/15/2011 03:50 PM, Keith Packard wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 18:29:54 +0300, Tomi Valkeinen
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 1) It's part of DRM, so it doesn't help fb or v4l2 drivers. Except if
>>> the plan is to make DRM the core Linux
2011/9/2 Christian König :
> Hi Rob,
>
>> + flipping between multiple back buffers, perhaps not in order (to
>> handle video formats with B-frames)
> Oh, yes please. The closed source drivers seems to do this also all the
> time, and I never really understood why DRI is limiting the buffers to
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Laurent Pinchart
wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> On Wednesday 16 March 2011 17:09:45 Alex Deucher wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 3:37 AM, Li Li wrote:
>> > Sorry but I feel the discussion is a bit off the point. We're not
>> >
strange tiling formats, etc.). You might be able to come up with some
kind of basic framework like TTM, but by the time you add the
necessary quirks for various hw, it may be bigger than you want.
That's why we have GEM and TTM and driver specific memory management
ioctls in the drm.
Alex
&
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 4:52 AM, Laurent Pinchart
wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> On Tuesday 15 March 2011 17:47:47 Alex Deucher wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> FWIW, I have yet to see any v4l developers ever email the dri mailing
>> list while discussing GEM, TTM, or the DRM, al
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Robert Fekete
wrote:
> On 8 March 2011 20:23, Laurent Pinchart
> wrote:
>> Hi Andy,
>>
>> On Tuesday 08 March 2011 20:12:45 Andy Walls wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2011-03-08 at 16:52 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> > > > It really shouldn't be that h
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Andy Walls wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-03-08 at 09:13 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We had a discussion yesterday regarding ways in which linaro can assist
>> V4L2 development. One topic was that of sorting out memory providers like
>> GEM and HWMEM.
>>
>> T
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 08, 2011 15:01:10 Andy Walls wrote:
>> On Tue, 2011-03-08 at 09:13 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > We had a discussion yesterday regarding ways in which linaro can assist
>> > V4L2 development. One topic was
12 matches
Mail list logo
