[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       freedesktop-xorg
Subject:    Re: Xgl/Xegl future?
From:       Ian Romanick <idr () us ! ibm ! com>
Date:       2005-08-29 15:30:25
Message-ID: 43132A11.6050402 () us ! ibm ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Matthias Hopf wrote:
> On Aug 25, 05 23:05:04 -0400, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>>On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 18:30 +0200, Matthias Hopf wrote:
>>
>>>Yes, but as soon as we want an abstraction layer (in this case OpenGL),
>>>this isn't easily accessible, as several hardware vendors chose to not
>>>convert YUV to RGB on PutImage, but during scanout (using color keying
>>>for selecting the YUV framebuffer).
>>
>>We're not talking about overlays (which will be little use with
>>compositing) but about using the 3D engine to do the colourspace
>>conversion and scaling.
> 
> I was talking about that there is no common interface for YUV to RGB
> conversion using the graphics hardware.  Thus we should do this with
> pixel shader, which *is* a common interface that is capable of doing
> this. We can have other implementations if the hardware doesn't support
> pixel shader, but this will be our first try.

But don't you really want to be able to use 422 source images?  Pixel
shaders won't help there.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDEyoRX1gOwKyEAw8RAmcJAJ9DhJpQVg4v2H+zJZQ1YICvSUnzAACcC9a4
ck2gx83Earh95dL0HCN4isY=
=27Up
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]