Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12

Thread: Mesa Slowly Picking Up OpenGL 3 Support

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    77

    Default

    To clear up a lot of misunderstandings here in the thread...

    First, OpenGL 3.0 is a problematic beast due to the different profiles. Any driver supporting OpenGL 3.0 must actually support all the legacy features as well, and it would therefore be insane not to base them on Mesa. Therefore:

    Quote Originally Posted by timofonic View Post
    Intel reinventing the wheel as always. Gallium3D is a must, please not poison it...
    Since Ian's work contains the core Mesa support, which is in turn used by the Mesa/OpenGL state tracker, this is definitely *not* wasted work.

    For OpenGL 3.2 core mode, it would be cleaner and more efficient (from a run-time performance point of view; from a development point of view it would be very inefficient) to have an entirely fresh restart and a non-Mesa based state tracker.

    Unfortunately, such a state tracker would obviously not be able to support legacy features; not a big problem if applications weren't expecting those features, but I'm afraid NVidia will set (or has already set) a precedent even on Linux in supporting OpenGL 3.2 with the full backwards compatibility, so applications will expect this full compatibility and so our drivers will have to support it and so we will be back where we started: at a 3.x capable state tracker based on Mesa; and therefore, Mesa needs those extensions.

    Developing 3.x state trackers in Mesa seems like a tremendous duplication of effort, considering Gallium already has them.
    Uhh... no? Where did you get that idea?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nanonyme View Post
    I haven't yet heard comments from radeon developers that anyone would actually want to do a full implementation of even OpenGL 2.0 with classic Mesa so I'd assume sooner or later at least radseon drivers migrate to Gallium3D API and that would be the community Gallium driver airlied spoke of, me thinks.
    I've decided not to do OpenGL 2.0 in classic Mesa. If somebody else wants to do it I'm not going to stop them, but personally I believe it would be better to let classic Mesa mature at OpenGL 1.5.

    Of course, my biggest contribution to OpenGL 2.0 support will probably be in the shader compiler, which is shared between the drivers.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •