On 06/20/2017 07:17 AM, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
On 06/20/2017 05:09 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On 20/06/17 03:00 AM, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
On 06/19/2017 07:44 PM, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
On 06/19/2017 07:26 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
Thomas Hellstrom writes:
Applications
On 06/20/2017 05:09 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On 20/06/17 03:00 AM, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
On 06/19/2017 07:44 PM, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
On 06/19/2017 07:26 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
Thomas Hellstrom writes:
Applications calling glXSwapBuffers should be able to expect
On 20/06/17 03:00 AM, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> On 06/19/2017 07:44 PM, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
>> On 06/19/2017 07:26 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
>>> Thomas Hellstrom writes:
>>>
Applications calling glXSwapBuffers should be able to expect that any X
rendering
On 06/19/2017 07:26 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
Thomas Hellstrom writes:
Applications calling glXSwapBuffers should be able to expect that any X
rendering submitted after the call to glXSwapBuffers returns should be ordered
with respect to the glXSwapBuffers call. (For
On 06/19/2017 07:44 PM, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
On 06/19/2017 07:26 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
Thomas Hellstrom writes:
Applications calling glXSwapBuffers should be able to expect that any X
rendering submitted after the call to glXSwapBuffers returns should
be ordered
Thomas Hellstrom writes:
> Applications calling glXSwapBuffers should be able to expect that any X
> rendering submitted after the call to glXSwapBuffers returns should be ordered
> with respect to the glXSwapBuffers call. (For example piglit reading out from
> a window).
Applications calling glXSwapBuffers should be able to expect that any X
rendering submitted after the call to glXSwapBuffers returns should be ordered
with respect to the glXSwapBuffers call. (For example piglit reading out from
a window). This appears not to be the case at least with the current