On Mon, 5 Dec 2005 17:29:29 +0100
Luc Verhaegen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This was said later on in this same mail:
I didn't full understand that :)
> It allows connection of most TMDS, LVDS and TV encoders, if chosen
> right, and if the fpga (or implementation) is able to handle, it should
> even allow for direct input. It's a semi-standard, and if the
> open-graphics hardware uses a common header for all these modules (they
> probably should include power and ground), mixing and matching will
> become almost trivial.
Hmm.. so it's a specialized digital video interface to extend
existing graphics cards with additional output devices ?
> For instance:
> standard og fpga device comes with 1 ramdac/CRT controller, 2 TMDS
> encoders and one TV encoder (which usually can also be used as a CRT
> controller). This should allow for 2 single link DVI-Is, of which one
> can be used as a composite/s-video/RGB or SCART (composite sync)/YUV TV
> connection.
This sounds interesting.
> Since cvt reduced blanking (which will be fully supported in Xorg 7.1)
> allows for a decent resolution already, the dual link DVI is not an
> immediate requirement for everyone.
Not immediate but it's forseeable. OGD is meant for testing
everything we might put into OGA
> If you do want dual link DVI, then there are 2 further DVO like
> connections, allowing for SIL178 daughterboards which connect to a
> header behind the DVI connectors for the secondary DVI links. The rest
> is handled in the FPGA and in the driver.
That sounds good, beside i think there is a huge demand
for dual screen and most are likely to want dual link.
> Similarly, another TV encoder can be stuck on the same DVO like
> headers, although that will require a seperate cable. Same thing for
> LVDS encoders, same thing for framegrabbers, be it digital or be it from
> TV or RGB. Why i dragged in VIP there i don't know, the VIP/capture (in)
> ports on the unichromes are usually used for TV or TMDS (out) too.
IMHO this is a very good idea. TV-Out is a huge demand, but
it's not something that all users need. If we can pull it out
of OGD and have a simple and more or less cheap daugher card
that provides that functionality, then we could get of with an
ever cheaper OGD board. The only thing that worries me is the
testing. If we split features out, they are less likely to be tested.
Which means more undetected bugs (not to talk about the added
complexity which also leads to more possible bugs).
Attila Kinali
--
wer soviel schoggi isst, kann sowieso nicht dumm sein ;-)
-- Sandra
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
