Owen Taylor wrote:
> Juliusz Chroboczek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>>MV> DGA really shouldn't be used and I regret that it's still in the
>>MV> X-server. I would like it to disappear in XFree86 5.0.
>>
>>Mark,
>>
>>I fully agree with your feeling, and I am sincerely sorry to say what
>>I'm about to say.
>>
>>There is no denying, though, that there are applications that want to
>>do client-side rendering -- and I think that's a perfectly legitimate
>>thing to do. The obvious solutions (PutImage and ShmPutImage) either
>>involve one copy too many, or else require you to put your rendering
>>buffers in a shared memory segment.
>>
>>I may be mistaken, but as far as I can see, the only way to do a
>>direct blit from a random client-specified buffer is DGA. Unless we
>>provide a different way to do that, there is little chance of DGA
>>going away with no loss.
>>
>
> If you are willing to give up the "Random" then, you can use ShmPixmaps
> or ShmImages and have:
>
> Blit from framebuffer specified data to screen - XShmPutImage
> Blit from RGB data to screen - RENDER
> Blit from YUV, etc to screen - Xv
>
> (I know less about the last.)
I'll add that image transfers can also be done via OpenGL using direct
rendering. That would be a more secure and reliable as well.
> In the cases that this doesn't work, well, the overhead of an extra
> memory => memory copy is just not all that significant these days.
> I don't think it is worth throwing away the security and robustness
> model and using DGA.
I'd like to see DGA go away, too.
--
/\
Jens Owen / \/\ _
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / \ \ \ Steamboat Springs, Colorado
_______________________________________________
Xpert mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
