p96 & cgx open standard replacement anyone?

[wawrzon]

since the old posts have been deleted i just wanted to repeat certain propsal here.

as we know nethier cgx nor p96, any kind of sdk or documentation allowing simply code drivers for these both only amiga rtg solutions, is publicly available. this unfortunate situation seems to be possible to overcome under the table. however an universal, possibly extendable solution may be more handy.

i dont want to force anything, let alone to drain developer resources and propose anything complicated. yet a possibilty that appears to me is usage of either whole aros kickstart or its graphics.library (freed of aros dependencies) as replacement.

aros cybergraphics is api compatible with cgx and contains a wrapper to use existing p96 drivers. of course there are still some bugs, unimplemented genuine amiga calls and speed issues in certain areas, still it might be a better starting point than anything else up to date.

as i say its just an idea, where to contribute for the sake of the platform, as i see it.

edit: typo in thread title

[wawrzon]

amiga rtg solutions as cgx and p96 support 2d hardware acceleration (apparently to a bit different extend) namely the gfx card blitter. 3d acceleration is another matter and is currently handled by warp3d (and upon that basic driver structure by either minigl or stormmesa)

but this is not a subject here. please lets stay on topic or let this thread die if there is no interest.

[wawrzon]

in any case you can softkick aros from amiga rom as i wrote in the other thread, not messing around much, just to see how fpgaarcade p96 driver works.

otherwise, yes, lets keep threads on topic, dou you open one or should i?

[wawrzon]

I'd inquired about the driver API per this link, but have not seen any response yet.

you wont receive any answer. not any soon, neither a satysfying one. also its not the subject here. what im talking about is an open community standard, with open sources, that benefits community projects, not another code trap.

there is a number of rtg projects underway as it look like. many mimic or recreate the existing cards, there already is a chipset driver for. all others face software problem at some point, because or closed sources. no matter who wants to keep them close. here as example:
http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=66865
we have hardware vendors defending their code and openpci standard which neither isnt properly open.
as long as standard and sources are closed, the situation will repeat.
the solution would be to create a common field where interested parties could rely on building drivers for their open or proprietary solutions. once the foundation is laid it would actually prevent unneccessarily reinventing the wheel.

[wawrzon]

If the API is open, sources can be written

both the aros cybergraphics api and sources are open,and compatible to cgx (de facto primary) standard, p96 is as well compatible to. so, we do have all material to start with actually. no need to open anything else.

[wawrzon]

That makes no sense, why would you want to keep an API closed?  You'd want more people to use it, right?  Kind of the whole point of having an API....

slaapliedje

unfortunatelly this exactly is the case. we want to talk about strategic solution here.

[wawrzon]

Ideally you'd just replace graphics.library with the one from aros (or use aros).

But the graphics.library design they came up with for aros was not optimised because pc's have fast cpu's and the ocs/ecs/aga driver is the bare minimum implementation and really slow too. It appears to be one of the major issues with running it on 68k hardware.

Sorting that out would have major benefits all round.

this has been brought repeatedly. though as someone who tests aros on amiga hardware i dont think the difference is so dramatic, even currently. i could think of some testcase measuring difference between lets say 3.9 and aros on the same config with the same resolution using librarytimer. is there something that stresses all functions of graphics.lib to be simply run from the shell?