Re: Vulkan WSI+VK_KHR_display for KMS/DRM?

From: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
To: Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com>
Cc: Chad Versace <chadversary@chromium.org>,
	dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: Vulkan WSI+VK_KHR_display for KMS/DRM?
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 07:45:38 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOFGe94DtfmkugO2TocjhRe+dREa67mFgavsaVQc_TBqvB5CEw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86pogtgt88.fsf@hiro.keithp.com>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1206 bytes --]

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com> wrote:

> Chad Versace <chadversary@chromium.org> writes:
>
> > The real path forward should be implemented on top of
> > VK_KHX_external_memory. If you want to start experimenting now with
> > Vulkan+KMS, you may want to look at
> > VK_EXTERNAL_MEMORY_HANDLE_OPAQUE_FD_KHX.
>
> It seems like the Vulkan spec for WSI with devices has a bunch of what I
> would need to implement in a standard fashion; I guess I'm unclear
> whether I should go down the route of wrapping all of DRM/KMS in a WSI
> layer, or use some of this lower-level stuff directly from the
> application instead?
>

Interesting question.  To my knowledge, no one has actually implemented the
Vulkan WSI direct-to-display extensions.  (I tried to prevent them from
getting released with 1.0 but failed.)  I believe the correct answer is to
use the external memory dma-buf stuff that chad and I have been using and
talk directly to KMS.  I see no good reason to have a large abstraction in
the middle.  dma-buf + KMS should give you Intel and radeon (with radv) so
that's most of it.  In particular, it will give you 100% of people who
actually care about DRM leases. :-)

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1727 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel