Olivier Martin wrote: > Just a little question to clarify my understanding of XServer design ... > >>From the DRI website, I can read this article about "DRI without X" ( > http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/DriWithoutX). But is it possible to have a > 3D-enabled XServer with GLX extension and without DRI extension (and module) > ?
Yes. You'll still need something to provide the bindings between GLX and the kernel/lower-level hardware drivers, though. > On "Introduction to the Direct Rendering Infrastructure" ( > http://dri.sourceforge.net/doc/DRIintro.html), it says about "XFree86 DRI > Extension": > > The XFree86-DRI X server extension is basically used for communication > between the other DRI > components (the X server, the kernel module, libGL.so and the 3D DRI > drivers). > > The DRI module maintains DRI-specific data structures related to > screens, windows, and rendering > contexts. When the user moves a window, for example, the other DRI > components need to be informed > so that rendering appears in the right place. > > Does it means any OGL implementation within the server-side must supply a > DRI module ? > What about the OGL Mesa library with SW rasterization only ? Does it supply > a DRI module (for managing a lock on the framebuffer) ? Yes, Mesa now provides a swrast_dri.so which X can use to provide direct rendering to software, as well as AIGLX. > Is it possible to use Mesa driver with a non-DRI backend in the server-side > ? There are non-DRI Mesa drivers, but I do not think that any of them interact in the same way with Xserver. ~ C. _______________________________________________ xorg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
