On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 03:00:43PM +0100, Attilio Fiandrotti wrote: > Sven Luther wrote: > >On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 12:50:19AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > >>Hi, > >> > >>On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 10:18:40AM +0100, Attilio Fiandrotti wrote: > >> > >>>If the bug is fixed when hw-acceleration is disabled i think a good idea > >>>would be making the libdirectfb or the gtk-rootskel udeb containing anto > >>>/etc/directfbrc configuration file that contains > >>> > >>>#prevents DFB from using hardware acceleration > >>>no-hardware > >>>#lets user dumping screen by pressing "Stamp" key > >>>screenshot-dir=/ > > > > > >Mmm, Attilio, i don't think this file should be hardcoded like that, but > >better provided by rootskel-gtk, or generated from rootskel-gtk at early > >runtime, as we may wish to make it configurable from /proc/cmdline, and do > >some more advanced matching depending on graphic card used or > >architecture, as > >i proposed yesterday. > > I think disabling hardware acceleration could be useful in many cases, > so we should evaluate what's the best choiche among: > > *Disablig hw accel by default inserting a static entry in > /etc/directfbrc file provided by gtk-rootskel. > -pro: simplest option, no per-videocard hw acceleration disabilitation > mechanism required; for our purposes we do not need hw acceleration; > reported bug like this could be easily imputable to DFB's unaccelerated > video driver so that we culd easily know where to dig in the case of DFB > crashes. > -con: this would prevent further potential bugs in accelerated DFB > drivers from being discovered.
This would at least need user-forced-acceleration-reenabling at runtime, in order to ease testing. > *DFB HW accel enabled by default, disabled by default for known broken > accelerated modes and user-disabilitable at boot-time using ad-hoc > parameters. > -pro: hw acceleration enabled by default would make the g-i a good test > bench for DFB > -con: per-card hw accel disabilitation mechanism has still to be > developed; users may be disoriented by crashing installations if they do > not know that DFB's hw acceleration can be disabled (remember that many > oh whom betatested the g-i tought it was based on XFree! ) It is trivial though, maybe 5 lines of shell or so. As for the rest, you just document it. > If we decide to keep the hw-acceleration enabled by default we'll need > co-operation from directfb-dev, were bugreports related to DFB crashes > that we may receive should be forwarded. Seems logic. > As soon as the g-i is released it, and henche DFB, will receive a lot of > testing from many users all around th world and this could be a good > testbench for DFB too. :) Like enabling yaird by default in the debian kernels did bring them a bug report storm :) Friendly, Sven Luther _______________________________________________ directfb-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.directfb.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/directfb-dev
