xf86-video-mach64: Branch 'master'

[Adam Jackson]

 src/atiscreen.c |   18 ++++--------------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

New commits:
commit 104e3e067a7dcac143cb672fe42d56396ba6087b
Author: Adam Jackson <ajax at redhat.com>
Date:   Wed Sep 26 16:21:25 2012 -0400

    Don't gratuitously disable Render when ShadowFBing
    
    There's no reason to do this, and I am at a loss to explain why that was
    ever done.  The first instance of this logic comes from xfree86 (over 11
    years ago!):
    
    http://cvsweb.xfree86.org/cvsweb/xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/ati/atiscreen.c.diff?r1=1.15&r2=1.16
    
    Now, cfb never had Render support, so that might make some sense if
    there was an intermediate uncommitted state where the driver used fb for
    direct but cfb for shadowed.  But that's really the only plausible
    explanation I can think of.
    
    Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson <ajax at redhat.com>

diff --git a/src/atiscreen.c b/src/atiscreen.c
index b1fbd3c..62a4dd9 100644
--- a/src/atiscreen.c
+++ b/src/atiscreen.c
@@ -476,21 +476,11 @@ ATIScreenInit(SCREEN_INIT_ARGS_DECL)
         }
     }
 
-    /* If applicable, initialise RENDER extension */
+    /* initialise RENDER extension */
+    if (!fbPictureInit(pScreen, NULL, 0) && (serverGeneration == 1))
     {
-        if (pATI->OptionShadowFB)
-        {
-            if (serverGeneration == 1)
-                xf86DrvMsg(pScreenInfo->scrnIndex, X_WARNING,
-                    "RENDER extension not supported with a shadowed"
-                    " framebuffer.\n");
-        }
-        else if (!fbPictureInit(pScreen, NULL, 0) &&
-                 (serverGeneration == 1))
-        {
-            xf86DrvMsg(pScreenInfo->scrnIndex, X_WARNING,
-                "RENDER extension initialisation failed.\n");
-        }
+	xf86DrvMsg(pScreenInfo->scrnIndex, X_WARNING,
+	    "RENDER extension initialisation failed.\n");
     }
 
     xf86SetBlackWhitePixels(pScreen);