Re: fallback mode vs llvmpipe rendering

On Mon, 2012-06-25 at 09:05 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

> > But there's an interest for going in other directions, and I don't want
> > to block those motivated people if we don't need gnome-panel anymore for
> > our "official" GNOME releases, which means if we don't need the fallback
> > mode anymore. And now that llvmpipe rendering has been available for a
> > few months, I wonder if we still need (or want) to keep the fallback
> > session.
> Unfortunately, there are still a few cases where software rendering
> doesn't help us.
> One example is ppc - no llvm support on that architecture...

Or s390 (anymore) or arm (effectively).  Honestly I'm coming to resent
llvm being billed as a portable JIT when the upstream architecture
support is so sketchy.

softpipe should work, in the sense that it'll draw correctly, but it's
not what you'd call fast.  Off the top of my head it's not multithreaded
like llvmpipe and it doesn't make any attempt to do pixel layout in a
SIMD-register-friendly way.

Certainly we could apply more thrust to more pigs though.

- ajax

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]