On Mit, 2002-02-20 at 18:11, Gustavo Alberto Homem wrote: > > > > I can only guess why 4.0.3 worked better than 4.1.0; I guess it's > > because the r128 driver in 4.0.3 didn't properly support 420 video (or > > was it 422? I forget :) yet. > > I don't know exactly what are those 420 and 422 ? Image formats ?
Yes. > How does that justify the fact that mpeg2 overlay performance degraded ? I was going to suggest that the better performance might have been at the cost of image quality, but I'm even less sure now... > What I complain about (with XFree 4.1 and XFree 4.2 DRI disabled) is a > very high cpu load when using XV output, which causes frame dropping. > With Xshm output I get no frame drops and Xv was supposed to provide better > performance, so I have to conclude that Xv output is broke in either 4.1 > and 4.2 , in the latter case it is broke in 2 different ways (but only for > mpeg). Other reports seem to back your suspicion that something is badly broken; unfortunately, I have no idea what. Someone will have to track it down. > > > 2 - The KDM login screen is completely messed (widgets are garbaged, not > > > drawn properly) > > > > I have fixed this in DRI CVS and submitted the fix to XFree86. > > > > Both 1) and 2) are due to the fact that the r128 driver does 2D > > acceleration differently with DRI enabled now. I'm sure you've also > > noticed the better 2D performance. :) > > I read that the 2d acceleration mode had to be changed because it was > incompatible with the use of bttv, but why have two diferent > implmentations ? There are two ways to program the chip which don't mix well. There's apparently a way to simulate one using the other though, which could indeed be used to unify the code. > What I noticed was that with DRI enabled Xv ouput was smooth again before > crashing (colors were wrong though), but that was the usual situation with > 4.03 regardless of DRI beeing enabled or disabled. It was smooth because the DRM was used to transfer the image data using DMA. > > > What is exactly the relation of Xvideo and dri ? > > > > They are conceptually independent, however as of 4.2.0, the r128 driver > > tries to take advantage of the DRM to accelerate Xv image transfer. > > Unfortunately, this doesn't work well with some chips, and there are > > also problems coordinating this with the new 2D acceleration yet. > > hmm, I had a very quick look at dri.sf.net info, and I think I read drm > was 3d only and that 2d data would allways go to the X server (they have a > picture :) ). Did this change ? Is drm going to be used for 2d in the > future ? The DRM is a generic resource manager. It was traditionally only used by the DRI, but that seems to be changing. -- Earthling Michel D�nzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast _______________________________________________ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
