[PATCH 2/2] protocol: Support scaled outputs and surfaces

[Bill Spitzak]

Jason Ekstrand wrote:

> I still think we can solve this problem better if the clients, instead 
> of providing some sort of pre-scaled buffer that matches the output's 
> arbitrary scale factor, simply told the compositor which output they 
> rendered for.

That is equivalent to providing a scale factor, except that the scale 
factor has to match one of the outputs.

A client will not be able to make a low-dpi surface if there are only 
high-dpi outputs, which seems pretty limiting.

You could say that the scaler api would be used in that case, but this 
brings up the big question of why this api and the scaler are different 
when they serve the same purpose?