On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Christopher Gregory
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-08-14 at 17:45 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Ken Moffat wrote:
>> >   As of xorg-server-1.16, glamor is included in xorg-server.  Ticket
>> > #5347 was created for this, but nobody apart from me (and Armin, for
>> > a clarification which led me to an optional --enable-glamor in the
>> > intel driver) has commented, and I have expressed my unwillingness
>> > to touch it because I won't be using it - changing things I don't
>> > use, and which don't get tested, is a recipe for pain in the future.
>> >
>> >   Since we are getting close to 7.6, it would be nice to resolve this
>> > one way or the other.  If people are willing to review this, and if
>> > my systems are usable (I'll probably be offline from time to time in
>> > the next few days, rebuilding my RAID array and then expanding it),
>> > I would be willing to touch this.
>> >
>> >   First, a question - does anyone reading this USE the radeonsi
>> > xorg driver ?
>>
>> Not me.  The last ATI card I used was on a 386 long retired. I believe
>> it was a Rage 128.
>>
>> >   My current understanding of glamor is:
>> >
>> > 1. it was developed initially by intel, but intel devs now prefer
>> > sna and regard glamor as experimental - it needs to be enabled at
>> > compile time, and also an xorg.conf entry at runtime to use it.
>> > OTOH, for newer drivers (such as radeon South Islands) it will speed
>> > up driver creation.
>> >
>> > 2. for radeon South Islands and newer (radeonsi) it is *required*.
>> > I do not have that hardware.  For earlier radeon chipsets (r300 and
>> > newer) it is available, but not the default : it requires another
>> > --enable-glamor at compile time, and a similar xorg.conf entry.  For
>> > South Islands, --enable-glamor is required, but not the xorg.conf
>> > entry.  We use a phrase like "not recently tested" for glamor on
>> > non-radeonsi radeons, I see no reason to change that.
>> >
>> > 3. glamor used to be a separate package (glamor-egl), which is what
>> > we still have in trunk.  Although the 1.16 server includes its own
>> > glamor [ with --enable-glamor ], it requires libepoxy (at least in
>> > my experience, but if I was doing this I would be happier if someone
>> > else confirmed that).  So, dropping glamor-egl is replaced by adding
>> > libepoxy.
>>
>> My thought is to not --enable-glamor, but explain it in the comments.
>> I've got no problem with dropping glamor-egl and adding libepoxy (as
>> built, not checked) as long as it gets done in the next week or so.
>>
>> > 4. Armin has put the internal xorg-server glamor, and libepoxy, into
>> > the systemd book.  To me, that appears to be the way to go.  He
>> > marked libepoxy as "recommended" which initially puzzled me (is
>> > there maybe an option to build without it?), but I now regard that
>> > as a technically correct description for the specified configure
>> > options.  If I was doing this in trunk, I think I would probably use
>> > --enable-glamor with an explanation that it is required for
>> > radeonsi, and for libepoxy I would add a modification " (Required
>> > only for glamor)".
>>
>> I'd suggest putting it as optional and specify '(required if using
>> glamor)' in the dependencies section of the xorg-server.
>>
>> It's doesn't seem to make sense for people like me with intel or nvidia
>> video cards.
>>
>> I could be wrong about all of this, but that's my current interpretation.
>>
>>    -- Bruce
>>
>
> Hello,
>
> For me I made the mistake of actually using the glamour included in the
> latest xorg server on my intel laptop.  I created the xorg.conf and
> rebooted.  In my case it slowed everything down.  It caused the mouse to
> lag and the actual screen refresh rate was slowed down so much you could
> almost see it creating the images pixel by pixel.
>
> Note that this is on an i686 laptop, and an elderly one at that.
>
> Needless to say I quickly recompiled without it and deleted the
> xorg.conf file and sanity was once again returned to my computer.
>
> Regards,
>
> Christopher.
>
>
> --
> http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
> Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Kaveri processor here, using RadeonSI w/ glamor.  Using pre xorg 1.16
glamor, 2d text rendering would take 1-2 seconds to draw a urxvt
window.  Now w/ xserver 1.16, nice and fast, but there is a bug w/
transparency in system tray icons (pidgin icon disapperars when using
lxpanel on openbox).  Saw a comment on the release that there was an
experimental patch for this on the xorg devel list, but I was not able
to find it.  (Still, nice having working urxvt terminals, even if I
have no pidgin system tray icon).

-- 
Nathan Coulson (conathan)
------
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Timezone: PST (-8)
Webpage: http://www.nathancoulson.com
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to