- Original Message -
From: Michel Dänzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Nathan Hand [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Michael Zayats [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 2:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] glDrawPixels on i810
On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 00:08, Nathan Hand wrote
- Original Message -
From: Michel Dänzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Nathan Hand [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Michael Zayats [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 2:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] glDrawPixels on i810
On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 00:08, Nathan Hand wrote
On Sun, 2001-10-07 at 17:43, Michael Zayats wrote:
On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 00:08, Nathan Hand wrote:
XV is completely independent of V4L and the DRI.
This is true conceptually and was true implementation-wise until
recently. However, the r128 driver uses the DRM to transfer the XvImage
I'd be happy to get to work making grabbing facilities, etc (for mga, which seems to
be the most stable accellerator) but for lack of experience and not much of a place to
start..
On the other hand, I'm getting paid to do it (part of my job), so chances are I'll
complete it.
Any pointers
Maybe I'm just paranoid, but why so much on the i810? This chipset is
slower than Mach64, and people never got it in the intention of doing
games, or other intense graphics.
Roberto Peon wrote:
I'd be happy to get to work making grabbing facilities, etc (for mga, which seems to
be the most
In our case, it isn't necessarily on the i810. We don't really care what accellerator
is used as long as it works well for textures and stenciling. Depth buffering is a
bonus, but not necessary for the majority of things that we do. Dest alpha, on the
other hand IS.
Right now we're evaluating
On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 00:08, Nathan Hand wrote:
XV is completely independent of V4L and the DRI.
This is true conceptually and was true implementation-wise until
recently. However, the r128 driver uses the DRM to transfer the XvImage
data now when possible, and Peter Surda has been bug^Wasking
I will present my problem in it's full, may be you will help me:
I am grabbing frames from bt848 and should both store them for future reuse
and get them on the screen. The box is i810 based and has many other tasks
to do.
putting video on a screen should be fast and very low CPU consuming.
Does current i810 drm accelerate 2D path?
I get about 6mln pps in drawpix :(
Michael
___
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
The DMA buffers and the frame buffer are in
a
unified memory pool, so it isn't any quicker to put the data into DMA
and
then have hardware upload it. Very little consumer hardware provides
support
for the operations necessary to implement much of drawpixels anyway.
what about
Michael Zayats wrote:
what about glPixelsZoom? I would have been very pleased to see it hardware
accelerated...
when the pixmap wont change i would load it as a texture
and draw it as a quad.
if its changing use gltexsubimage to update it. i dont think its a
special path
for the 810
On Sun, Sep 30, 2001 at 10:09:47PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
| Is it really a pure hardware problem? Rumors on comp.graphics.opengl
| are that the vendors don't invest time optimizing that path (in the
| driver) because there's not much demand for it. ...
Most consumer-level
12 matches
Mail list logo
