[Xorg] Re: Damage/Composite + direct rendering clients
aritger at nvidia.com
Mon May 24 12:37:15 PDT 2004
On Mon, 24 May 2004, Ian Romanick wrote:
> Andy Ritger wrote:
> > The other concern (how to make sure direct rendering has completed
> > by the time the drawable is used as a source in a composite
> > operation) conceptually would be solved as you describe, but I
> > expect the implementation would be buried deeper
> I guess I don't see what the problem is. The graphics device processes
> commands as a FIFO. Groups of direct rendering commands are surrounded
> by a lock. If the compositor uses the same lock, synchronization and
> proper ordering are guaranteed.
How does the composite manager use the same lock? If it's simply
using Render requests to perform the compositing, does the X server
need to lock whenever it processes a Render request. Does it do
so today? What happens if the X server performs the Render request
You're also assuming you have one global fifo, whereas some hardware
has a separate fifo per hw graphics client and the hw context
switches between fifos.
> Determining if direct rendering has damaged a region is another kettle
> of fish, though...
Yes, but I actually think that is going to be the easy part :)
More information about the xorg