From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bugzilla-daemon@freedesktop.org Subject: [Bug 92220] GL_NV_vdpau_interop partially available Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2015 09:24:17 +0000 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0419197791==" Return-path: Received: from culpepper.freedesktop.org (unknown [131.252.210.165]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C95C46E17B for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 02:24:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "dri-devel" To: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org --===============0419197791== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="1443864257.D5FB1.29878"; charset="UTF-8" --1443864257.D5FB1.29878 Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 09:24:17 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92220 --- Comment #10 from riaasm@yahoo.com --- So if I understand this correctly, all versions of UVD can perform frame-based interop. I assume that the UVD hardware was created to perform frame-based interop, but after the GL_NV_vdpau_interop extension was proposed/suggested/completed by Nvidia the UVD hardware was updated to also allow field-based interop. The version in which this update was done is UVD 2.2. This explains why the UVD hardware only partially supports the GL extension, since it wasn't aware of the extension at the time the UVD hardware was created. Is this correct? If so, userspace apps that only need frame-based interop can just check if UVD is available since it should work on any UVD hardware. And userspace apps that need field-based interop can check for the GL extension. Would this be a reasonable and correct way to check for interop functionality -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. --1443864257.D5FB1.29878 Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 09:24:17 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"

Comment # 10 on bug 92220 from 
So if I understand this correctly, all versions of UVD can perform frame-based
interop. I assume that the UVD hardware was created to perform frame-based
interop, but after the GL_NV_vdpau_interop extension was
proposed/suggested/completed by Nvidia the UVD hardware was updated to also
allow field-based interop. The version in which this update was done is UVD
2.2. 

This explains why the UVD hardware only partially supports the GL extension,
since it wasn't aware of the extension at the time the UVD hardware was
created. Is this correct?

If so, userspace apps that only need frame-based interop can just check if UVD
is available since it should work on any UVD hardware. And userspace apps that
need field-based interop can check for the GL extension. Would this be a
reasonable and correct way to check for interop functionality

You are receiving this mail because:
  • You are the assignee for the bug.
--1443864257.D5FB1.29878-- --===============0419197791== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KZHJpLWRldmVs IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApkcmktZGV2ZWxAbGlzdHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnCmh0dHA6Ly9saXN0 cy5mcmVlZGVza3RvcC5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9kcmktZGV2ZWwK --===============0419197791==--