From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kce67-0005Yd-Of for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:35:55 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kce65-0005VT-41 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:35:55 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55654 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Kce64-0005VG-Qo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:35:52 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:36855) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Kce64-0005Ih-5m for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:35:52 -0400 Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 11:35:43 +0100 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] opengl rendering in the sdl window Message-ID: <20080908103543.GF2315@redhat.com> References: <48B81423.9050502@eu.citrix.com> <48BF4F4F.40208@codemonkey.ws> <48BFB318.206@eu.citrix.com> <20080905120214.GD1373@shareable.org> <48C16207.5090808@eu.citrix.com> <20080905165536.GA12606@redhat.com> <48C38757.5030507@qumranet.com> <20080907115735.GA12055@redhat.com> <48C3D334.40408@qumranet.com> <48C4FEB1.3060109@eu.citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48C4FEB1.3060109@eu.citrix.com> Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 11:30:09AM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > I completely agree with Avi: Opengl has been around since 1992, and now > you tell me that it is better not to use it because it breaks Compiz?! > To say the least it would be a bad long term engineering decision. It would be a bad decision *if* OpenGL were the only technical solution to the problem. There are a variety of possible solutions with various pluses & minuses. If it is possible to do an implementation which uses hardware acceleration for scaling to get the same level of performance as the OpenGL proposal, it is good sense to evaluate it. Blindly going for OpenGL when it has known problems without evaluating alternatives would be the bad engineering decision. Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|