-----Original Message----- From: Michel Dänzer [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 2010年7月21日 15:56 To: Huang, FrankR Cc: Mart Raudsepp; Deucher, Alexander; Torres, Rigo; Writer, Tim; [email protected]; [email protected]; Cui, Hunk Subject: RE: Glyph rendering
On Mit, 2010-07-21 at 15:30 +0800, Huang, FrankR wrote: > > I have tested if it using PICT_a8r8g8b8 trick when it is fully > implemented in HW(althought the result is wrong). The speed(may be is > maximum) is nearly 100000/s. That sounds better. > But as you known, for the PICT_a8r8g8b8 method, the width and height > of source sometimes can not be divied by 4(such as 5...), so the > remaining pixel PictOpAdd should be done by SW code. The height doesn't matter, and if there's a writemask it should be possible to use that to mask out source/destination pixels that don't align to an ARGB pixel. [Frank] Yes. My description is not accurate, we only care width for this condition. Do you mean the writemask implemented in HW? From what I found, it is not in geode GP. :( > For the mixed way(HW+SW as I described above), the speed can be > 50000/s, unfortunely the result still is not correct(seems correct by > debugging, I'm still checking it). Sounds like maybe you're not properly synchronizing between GPU and CPU access. [Frank] Michael, maybe you misunderstand. The "SW" I mean is that our driver still use a formula to do the "+" operation in video memory instead of fallback to server handling(may be you means this). We don't fallback anymore. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.vmware.com Libre software enthusiast | Debian, X and DRI developer _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
