Jens- I agree with you, supporting HW accelerated indirect rending would be a good thing.
Take a look at the DRI high level design doc:
http://dri.sourceforge.net/doc/design_high_level.html
In section 4.3, Indirect Rendering, there's a section on Multi-rendering in a single address space.
Caution, newbie question! Indirect rendering doesn't currently get its own thread, does it?
No.
It does affect interactivity, but I'm curious how much of the benefit you'd gain would be from making it direct, and how much of the benefit would be from moving GLX requests to a second thread.
Without threads, there is a definite tradeoff between X interactivity and 3D performance/latency. My leaning years ago when we designed the DRI was towards doing a daemon process and taking the 3D hit in favor of portability, but threading supporting in most modern OS's has improved considerably since then. I would definitely lean towards using a local thread in the server today.
[KHLS94] Mark J. Kilgard, Simon Hui, Allen A Leinwand, and Dave Spalding. X Server Multi-rendering for OpenGL and PEX. 8th Annual X Technical Conference, Boston, Mass., January 25, 1994. Available from <http://reality.sgi.com/opengl/multirender/multirender.html>.
I sent Kilgard a note asking him if he knows of an archived copy. It's a damn shame reality.sgi.com went down before it got into the google cache.
Thanks Karl and Alan for the pointers to the cached copies.
--
/\
Jens Owen / \/\ _
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / \ \ \ Steamboat Springs, Colorado------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: The Definitive IT and Networking Event. Be There! NetWorld+Interop Las Vegas 2003 -- Register today! http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?keyn0001en _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
