[PATCH xserver] Xwayland: Enable EGL backend automatically

[Lyude Paul]

On Mon, 2018-05-28 at 09:11 +0200, Olivier Fourdan wrote:
> Hey Luyde,
> 
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 7:54 PM, Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> wrote:
> > NAK, unfortunately this check isn't going to be enough, see:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 2018-05-24 15:44:34     jadahl  Lyude: you can also look at the globals
> > sent
> > 
> > out by the compositor
> > 
> > 2018-05-24 15:44:52     Lyude   jadahl: you mean the wl interfaces
> > 
> > 2018-05-24 15:45:30     jadahl  yes
> > 
> > 2018-05-24 15:46:22     --      manuelschneid3r is now known as manuels
> > 
> > 2018-05-24 15:51:02     --      manuels is now known as manuelschneid3r
> > 
> > 2018-05-24 15:52:04     Lyude   jadahl: hm. i thought that hadn't been
> > working
> > 
> > before, but something must have changed because it appears to work now
> > 
> > 2018-05-24 15:53:03     jadahl  checking for the EGL extension alone might
> > not
> > 
> > be enough anyhow, in case the compositor doesn't actually support anything
> > on
> > 
> > the other end
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I'm going to try to come up with a patch that uses this approach today,
> > and I
> > 
> > will include you in the CC for it
> 
> [Adding Jonas in CC]
> 
> Great thanks for the reviews!
> 
> I agree that we need to check for the protocol availability of course, yet
> it doesn't mean we should ditch this patch.
> 
> Imagine (I say imagine, I do not know if that's plausible, nor if it's even
> possible), some vendor pushing for EGL streams realizing they could as well
> support GBM in the future, we would end up with both being supported, in
> which case we should probably still prefer GBM if we were to chose
> automatically.
> 
> So, in this scenario, checking for GBM availability to decide whether or not
> we should enable one or the other backend is still a good thing,
> independently of the protocol availability.
Oh! I should have looked closer at the patch, sorry about that-I had assumed
it was checking for the EGLStream interfaces in the way that halfline had
mentioned.
Anyway:Reviewed-by: Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com>
> Hence, I think we should still consider this patch.
> 
> Cheers,
> Olivier
> 
-- 
Cheers,
	Lyude Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/attachments/20180529/173b84bf/attachment.html>