Stéphane Marchesin <stephane.marche...@gmail.com> writes: > With that said, I don't think it's that difficult/different. I can > design a GLX extension spec and send a draft, then we can work from > there.
Yeah, some concrete plan for GL would be really nice to have, at least as a starting point. > That is actually not what you want because it is a waste of bandwidth. > Since compositors are typically bandwidth limited, you instead want to > paint only the relevant sub regions. Those are easy to determine by > transforming X damage regions into screen coordinates. Of course, that's what SwapRegion is for -- it will get to pick whether to copy or page flip and let the client know what happened, the region you pass > Most non-trivial compositing managers are already using partial update > schemes through GLX_MESA_copy_sub_buffer or the GLX_EXT_buffer_age > extensions + copies. I don't think it is far fetched to support a list > of rectangles instead. A region is already a list of rectangles; the only restriction that the relative location of all of the source and dest rectangles is the same. This satisfies the goal of doing a damage-based back->front update. -- keith.pack...@intel.com
pgpb3Q267E6v2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
