On 8/24/06, Hamish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We could just have the driver do that. If two applications are trying
But that's why I'd thougt about making this a hardware function.
Never have the hardware do something the driver can do perfectly well.
This is one of those high-level things that can be handled in
software with trivial overhead, so we should do it that way.
If we simplify things too much, we'll run into a case where one
application could get unfair access to the GPU. I think we'll just
have to live with that. Worst case, we'll have the driver time how
long each app is tying up the GPU and if someone's generating too many
commands (or commands that take a long time to render), then we'll
drop its priority.
I was thinking blocks of commands up to a fixed max size. Almost like a
hardware sceduler I guess like Lourens said. But would that be bad?
I'm thinking perhaps too much in terms of a universal API like in the
other thread. But SOMETHING is going to have to centralize access to
the GPU and manage the ring buffer. Then we have to write X11 and
Mesa drivers that behave themselves.
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
