The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland
Phoronix: The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland
With the continued speculation and FUD about the future of Wayland at a time when Canonical is investing heavily into their own Mir Display Server alternative, Eric Griffith and Daniel Stone have written an article for Phoronix where they lay out all the facts. The "Wayland Situation" is explained with first going over the failings of X, the fixings of Wayland, common misconceptions about X and Wayland, and then a few other advantages to Wayland. For anyone interested in X/Wayland or the Linux desktop at a technical level, it's an article certainly worth reading!
Could you explain how X and Wayland use the graphic card? I mean... in the article you say that Wayland receive buffers and how to display them.
What sort of information will Wayland receive to display the buffers: For hybrid graphics, who says which graphic card has to be used? Will be a sort of native Optimus (use the dedicated card if the integrated is busy, or sorts) ?
I assume you'll need nVidia and Intel updating their drivers for Wayland. Are there any news on the subject? Last time I heard no hardware vendor planned any Wayland related work.
Mir, Wayland and SurfaceFlinger all have a requirement on an EGL driver. That being said, there is one non-standard extension to EGL that Wayland does want / require. As long as Intel, nVidia, and AMD all have an EGL stack they-- to my knowledge-- should work just fine across all three. With the small exception of: wayland wants an extra non-standard extension. I think its buffer_age but I'd have to double check that as well.
Originally Posted by Bucic
In layman terms - are their drivers set to be ready to work with Wayland today? In a year?
Originally Posted by Ericg
On the subject, some EGL news
Last edited by Bucic; 06-07-2013 at 02:32 PM.
Question for everyone else: Would you guys be interested in a systemd / SysV / Upstart comparison as well? I was toying around with the idea in my head, hadn't made up my mind yet.
With the advent of Steam for Linux and the non-stop news about upcoming games for it, I'd like to ask a question which might be interesting for all the "gamers" using Linux: Does Wayland have any direct impact on playing games on Linux, like for example input lag (which people seem to complain about), performance improvements, gamepad support and so on? Or will there be next to no difference from the current situation?
I have six questions:
1. How are top-level windows and sub-surface windows kept synchronized, perhaps using flash in a web-browser as an example?
2. What happens when part of a sub-surface window is obscured within a top-level window, such as using the scroll bar to move the flash animation above or below the top of the window?
3. I assume sub-surfaces have to be part of another window, but can they be nested (i.e. a sub-surface window being part of another sub-surface window), or can sub-surface windows only be part of top-level windows?
4. Do sub-surface windows have complete control over their own buffer, or can top-level windows manipulate one of its sub-surface window buffers before passing it to the compositor?
5. Why is the coordinate counter 31 bits? That seems like a strange number.
6. Is the coordinate counter count the total number of pixels, or the pixel along a particular axis? This isn't clear from the description.
Can you explain how an OpenGL application uses Wayland?
Originally Posted by Ericg
Is it something like this?
[application] -> [opengl] -> [wayland buffer] -> [egl] -> [driver]
Who provides the OpenGL stack? If it is the GFX vendor, will he be able to hook into Wayland without having to open source his driver or GL stack?
In other words: Are proprietary drivers possible without having to rewrite half of Wayland?
Tags for this Thread