EGLStreams XWayland Code Revised Ahead Of X.Org Server 1.20

[phoronix]

Phoronix: EGLStreams XWayland Code Revised Ahead Of X.Org Server 1.20

It's still not clear if the EGLStreams XWayland support will be merged for xorg-server 1.20 but at least the patches were revised this week, making it possible to merge them into this next X.Org Server release for allowing the NVIDIA proprietary driver to work with XWayland...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=EGLStreams-XWayland-Revised

[R41N3R]

I don't need this support for the propriatary driver, but as it seems to block the release of X.Org 1.20 I hope it get's merged soon.

[Pepec9124]

If it gets merged then Nvidia has won. Even more fragmentation for community.

[polarathene]

If it gets merged then Nvidia has won. Even more fragmentation for community.

As opposed to what? Current proprietary nvidia users being stuck on X11 while others move to Wayland in the future? How is that not anymore fragmented? Either way, whomever is against EGLStreams because it's extra maintenance, is still going to have the same issue for X11, or they can just say "sorry nvidia users, Wayland is the future, we're not supporting X11 anymore" or "Sorry nvidia users, we don't support EGLStreams, please raise issue with your vendor(nvidia) or move to hardware better supported in an open source world".

Just because there is some support there doesn't mean developers are required to support it. I'm pretty sure the intention is to deprecate X11 once Wayland is able to replace it. Just like plenty of distros have replaced and stopped supporting other parts of the OS in the past.

Just because this gets merged doesn't many anyone has "won". Nobody is forced to make different decisions as a result. If some devs (presumably ones using nvidia hardware) want to make use of it with Wayland, great, what is the problem there?

[starshipeleven]

As opposed to what?

As opposed to NVIDIA actually conforming to standards every once in a while and not requiring devs to add support to their own stuff everywhere if they want to run on NVIDIA cards.

Current proprietary nvidia users being stuck on X11 while others move to Wayland in the future? How is that not anymore fragmented?

That's an NVIDIA fragmentation problem and not a community fragmentation problem?

Either way, whomever is against EGLStreams because it's extra maintenance, is still going to have the same issue for X11,

That's not the point. If everyone bends over backwards to NVIDIA then they will have 0 incentive to actually follow standards, which is one of the reasons Linux is great, many things can be swapped to have different effects and everything will still overall work.

If it goes on like this, NVIDIA cards will only work on the Standard Desktop (GNOME) and in commercial products using Qt-based compositors when X11 is finally dropped and Wayland becomes the default, as none else is interested (KDE) or has the manpower (everyone else) to deal with EGLStreams.

Just because there is some support there doesn't mean developers are required to support it.

Which means it will cause fragmentation on what DEs will support it for no other reason than NVIDIA being run by a bag of dicks that can't just follow the fucking standards even if it is somewhat mildly inconvenient for them.

[MoonMoon]

As opposed to NVIDIA actually conforming to standards

Would you mind to give me a link where I can look up the standards you mention?

[KudlatyAmroth]

starshipeleven so... systemd also is not standard as init scripts, and that doesn't mean that it is not better. Also here EGLStreams seems to be better, so why not to follow that?
I think that OpenSource world should follow that what is better. Wayland is better than X11, systemd is better than initd, and EGLStreams are better than GBM.

[DanL]

I find it funny that the people complaining about "maintenance burden" act like they're the ones who are stuck with it. The code was written by a RedHat-paid dev and longtime Linux graphics contributor (Adam Jackson).

As for GBM, it's not a good open standard since it's tied to Mesa/Gallium. We need something more agnostic. The GBM zealots saying, "F Nvidia and Khronos. We're the standard because we were here first and we're not interested in a better solution." are the ones causing fragmentation.

[droste]

Would you mind to give me a link where I can look up the standards you mention?

https://www.khronos.org/registry/EGL/extensions/KHR/EGL_KHR_platform_gbm.txt

[starshipeleven]

Would you mind to give me a link where I can look up the standards you mention?

The standard I'm talking about in this case is "GBM" or Generic Buffer Management, it is a Mesa API to allocate buffers for graphics rendering, see a simple description on wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesa_(...fer_Management

As for how it is defined (i.e. what functions you can call and how they work) you can only download Mesa source https://mesa3d.org/repository.html and you can find the source of this interface component in mesa/src/gbm
I assume that they thought the source code (plus some comments) is self-explanatory enough for what it is and its intended audience, there is no text-based description of each function afaik. It's just a few pages of code, not a lot of stuff.

I'm not a graphics developer so I have a limited understanding of the workflow, but it's basically a bunch of functions called by your application.

This is a "hello world" example of how it is used in a program (together with EGL and DRI) to render things on screen. https://www.sevirt.com/index.php?con...iew&id_post=12