Gildas Bayard wrote: > Hello, > > Coming back to look at directFB after working on something else. I'd > like to continue the thread about trying to understand the relationship > between all the hardware acceleration layers. (the post title was > "DirectFBGL and Mesa") > > Is this schema correct? : > > +-----------------+-----------------------------+ > | | 2D+3D accelerated DirectFB | > | +-----------------------------+ > | 2D accelerated | DirectFBGL | > | DirectFB +-----------------------------+ USER > | | MESA embedded * | > | +-----------------------------+ > | | DRI (user side part) * | > +-----------------+-----------------------------+======= > | | DRI (kernel side part: DRM) | > | +-----------------------------+ KERNEL > | Frame buffer (2D support) | > +-----------------------------------------------+
You should remove the top most item from the right column. > * special version patched for DirectFB > MESA embedded and DRI are slightly modified version tweeked for DFB, right? Yes, the enhancement was to support arbitrary rendering buffers, i.e. move the buffer setup from the global state to the contexts. > DRI exists for different architectures but DirectFBGL only for matrox if > I remember well. Does that mean that the fact DirectFBGL is not > available on other archs is because the patches on MESA and DRI have not > been done? I think it should work with Matrox on any architecture with agpgart. > BTW, is DRM sitting on top of framebuffer (as I sketched) or aside? No, it's independent. -- Best regards, Denis Oliver Kropp .------------------------------------------. | DirectFB - Hardware accelerated graphics | | http://www.directfb.org/ | "------------------------------------------" _______________________________________________ directfb-users mailing list [email protected] http://mail.directfb.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/directfb-users
