On 11/04/2009 06:35 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:

Vincent Hanquez wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 11:38:18AM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:

quoted

On 11/03/2009 01:25 PM, Vincent Hanquez wrote:

quoted

not sure if i'm missing the point here, but couldn't it be 
hypothetically
extended to stuff 3d (or video&  more 2d accel ?) commands too ? I 
can't
imagine the cirrus or stdvga driver be able to do that ever ;)

cirrus has pretty good 2d acceleration.  3D is a mega-project though.

absolutely huge indeed, but still alexander's code is pretty much the
only way, to start such a project. with maybe added benefits on more
and easier 2d acceleration.

or otherwise wait for SR-IOV graphics cards (or similar tech)...

I think the real question is do we paravirtualize a VGA device or a 
framebuffer.

Obviously, the advantage of doing a framebuffer is that it works for 
s390.

A VGA device has better backwards compatibility on PCs although it's 
obviously more complex.  In an ideal world, we could expose the virtio 
framebuffer device as part of PCI device that was also VGA capable 
(virtio-pci-vga transport?).

But then there's QXL on the horizon which complicates matters further.

qxl is vga compatible.

I'd say that virtio-fb should just focus on the s390 use case for 
now.  Let things evolve as needed.

Sure.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function