On Sun, Aug 04, 2002 at 12:37:51PM +0200, Denis Oliver Kropp wrote: > This sounds really cool, but I don't know if it works with my G550, too.
I only have access to a G400 DH so someone will have to test it. > One question: Does it override the secondary framebuffer device? Yes. All crtc2 programming is completely done in DirectFB. Maven is also programmed from DirectFB but via /dev/i2c. Only thing that would require additional kernel stuff is vsync (or more precisely vblank in this case). I was thinking about passing a flag to the crtc1 FBIO_WAITFORVSYNC. What do you think? > Having single > head support in matroxfb only with full access to both heads and > memory in DirectFB seems to be an acceptable solution. We just have to > add support for layers on another screen (output)... That's what I figured. One problem is that it won't work with a monitor. So if someone wants to use on monitor w/ crtc2 they'll have to use matroxfb_crtc2. And that won't allow multihead operation. One other thing is that 656 mode forces interlaced operation. I'm not sure that's a problem though. According to the specs it should support non-interlaced operation in all but ARGB mode but I was unable to make it work. I believe this is simply because maven assumes interlaced data. The biggest drawback might be the fixed resolution. All applications that want hardware scaling will have to use a temporary surface and do a stretchblit from there. That's what I assume is done even in Windows since crtc2 was using ARGB mode while I was playing some divx videos. I was thinking about the possibility of making this transparent to the user. That would mean having two surfaces allocated and doing a stretchblit inside the driver. Any ideas? -- Ville Syrj�l� [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sci.fi/~syrjala/ -- Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe directfb-dev" as subject.
