From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: Michel =?iso-8859-1?q?D=E4nzer?= Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: R128 Scaling. References: <878z7nuamf.fsf@hades.nocrew.org> <1018963230.1590.2438.camel@tibook> From: Stefan Berndtsson Date: 16 Apr 2002 15:30:57 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1018963230.1590.2438.camel@tibook> Message-ID: <87662rrcry.fsf@hades.nocrew.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Michel Dänzer writes: > On Tue, 2002-04-16 at 13:49, Stefan Berndtsson wrote: > > > > When running XF4.2, without UseFBDev, scaling is no longer available, which > > makes sense if it's a patch in the framebuffer. > > XFree86 4.2 does support scaling on its own, but you need to provide it > the panel resolution, as should be visible in the log. Ok.. I will have a look at that. I noticed all DGA using programs makes the X-server crash when the programs exit, on your XF4.2. > Or maybe it wrongly uses a 640 pitch? The virtual width is always 1024. > > This could be a bug either in the X driver's DGA support or xmame. Could very well be. The DGA-hack is another patch floating around somewhere that fixed some basic DGA stuff on the ibook2, but was known to crash from time to time. > Note that fullscreen doesn't require DGA per se. Direct framebuffer > access is generally slow, xmame might be better off using normal X > images or pixmaps and relying on an optimized ImageWrite acceleration in > the driver. I know you technically, don't need DGA for fullscreen, but afaik, MAME supports -x11-mode 0 or 1, where 0 is window, and 1 is DGA. Comparing the two on a stationary machine, where LCD-scaling isn't an issue, DGA is faster in every case. Also comparing small SDL-hacks in the same environment, DGA beats non-DGA hands down. /Stefan ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/