From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FGQQT-0003Hh-Vz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 19:51:46 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FGQQL-0003DB-At for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 19:51:40 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FGQQK-0003Cw-JX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 19:51:36 -0500 Received: from [32.97.110.154] (helo=e36.co.us.ibm.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1FGQSp-0007dK-EJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 19:54:11 -0500 Received: from d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.106]) by e36.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k270pYKK014724 for ; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 19:51:34 -0500 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (d03av01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.167]) by d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.8) with ESMTP id k270sMSr178036 for ; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 17:54:23 -0700 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k270pYDF012403 for ; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 17:51:34 -0700 Received: from [9.65.80.3] (sig-9-65-80-3.mts.ibm.com [9.65.80.3]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k270pXvM012376 for ; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 17:51:33 -0700 Message-ID: <440CD914.5010101@us.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 18:51:32 -0600 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] Use opaque alpha channel to support Xgl References: <440B69F3.1070801@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Christian Walther wrote: > Anthony Liguori wrote: > >> I really don't like this patch as it seems like a hack but I couldn't >> figure out a way to differentiate in SDL between a 24-bit depth with >> a 32-bit pixel width (which is a common, non-alpha format) and a true >> 32 bit depth with an alpha channel. > > Check SDL_Surface->format.Amask (see > http://www.libsdl.org/cgi/docwiki.cgi/SDL_5fPixelFormat). Here's the pixel format under normal X (24 bit depth): BitsPerPixel 32 BytesPerPixel 4 Rloss Gloss, Bloss, Aloss {0, 0, 0, 8} Rshift, Gshift, Bshift, Ashift {16, 8, 0, 0} Rmask, Gmask, Bmask, Amask {ff0000, ff00, ff, 0} Colorkey: 0 Alpha: 255 Here's the pixel format under Xgl: BitsPerPixel 32 BytesPerPixel 4 Rloss Gloss, Bloss, Aloss {0, 0, 0, 8} Rshift, Gshift, Bshift, Ashift {16, 8, 0, 0} Rmask, Gmask, Bmask, Amask {ff0000, ff00, ff, 0} Colorkey: 0 Alpha: 255 Notice that they are identical. They probably shouldn't be (what's SDL doing not setting an Amask when there is an alpha channel...). >> Hopefully, this will be fixed in future versions of SDL. > > I'm not convinced there's something to fix in SDL rather than Qemu > (but I'm not familiar with the issue), but if there is, please post > this on the SDL mailing list (sdl@libsdl.org, > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.sdl). I will. Regards, Anthony Liguori > -Christian > > > > _______________________________________________ > Qemu-devel mailing list > Qemu-devel@nongnu.org > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel