On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 01:46:39 +0100, Michel D�nzer wrote:
> On Die, 2003-02-18 at 20:10, Alan Hourihane wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 10:49:58 -0800, Nolan Leake wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2003-02-16 at 16:36, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
> > > >    I don't really know what the point of fbIsVirtual was.
> > > > Apps that use ShadowFBInit need to repaint when entering
> > > > the VT.  We didn't have the EnableDisableFBAccess stuff
> > > > when I wrote shadowfb and the refresh at EnterVT was to
> > > > catch the copy from the old root window backing pixmap.
> > > > With EnableDisableFBAccess handling exposures, it shouldn't
> > > > be needed anymore but we definitely don't want to 
> > > > block EnableDisableFBAccess like the code is doing.
> > > > 
> > > > It seems like having ShadowFBInit call ShadowFBInit2 with
> > > > FALSE is the correct behavior.  Experimentation shows
> > > > this to remove the corruption.
> > > 
> > > The previous shadowfb code blocked EnableDisableFBAccess and updated on
> > > VT switching.  Since the code looked stale (I couldn't find where the
> > > screen got stored in the backing pixmap anywhere), I disabled it for the
> > > vmware driver, but since I didn't have a way to test the other clients
> > > of shadowfb, I preserved the old behavior for them.
> > > 
> > > If having ShadowFBInit call ShadowFBInit2 with FALSE works for all
> > > clients, then the fbIsVirtual flag can be removed entirely; the only
> > > caller of ShadowFBInit2 is vmware.c, and it passes in FALSE.
> > 
> > O.k. Thanks Nolan.
> > 
> > I've just removed that code from the CVS.
> 
> You missed this.

Thanks, although there's no functional difference.

Alan.
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to