Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Would you support a new Unified Opensource RTG standart?  (Read 21776 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Will you support a new Unified Opensource RTG standart?
« on: April 08, 2010, 09:46:35 PM »
Quote from: bloodline;552240
What's wrong with P96?


Lack of readily available SDK for developing new drivers?
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Will you support a new Unified Opensource RTG standart?
« Reply #1 on: April 08, 2010, 09:53:21 PM »
I voted maybe. If the driver SDK for an existing standard can be made available to developers, I would probably prefer that route, since creating an entirely new one is a much larger project.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Will you support a new Unified Opensource RTG standart?
« Reply #2 on: April 08, 2010, 10:32:02 PM »
Quote from: Golem!dk;552263
I thought this was covered in the other thread, besides it is still in development in case you missed it.

What about making the m68k CGX v4.2 driver SDK available? That's all that's really being asked. Nobody is expecting CGX5 to be opened up.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Will you support a new Unified Opensource RTG standart?
« Reply #3 on: April 08, 2010, 10:48:06 PM »
Quote from: Tumbleweed;552271
I voted maybe. I use P96 with my CV64-3D (A4000D), CV64 (A3000D) and Picasso-II (A2000) cards.

What advantages would an open source RTG standard have over what I've already got?

Weed


Apart from the possibility of newer/faster drivers and drivers for cards you couldn't use before?
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Will you support a new Unified Opensource RTG standart?
« Reply #4 on: April 09, 2010, 12:13:11 AM »
@wawrzon

Bit early for implementation detail, but I don't really see these methods as being beneficial (not to mention potentially dangerous if something needs to patch a particular call) when you consider the only calls that really need accelerating are the ones that do graphic operations and in those cases, the time spent actually doing work is likely to take orders of magnitude longer than the library call itself.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Will you support a new Unified Opensource RTG standart?
« Reply #5 on: April 09, 2010, 10:48:11 AM »
Quote from: Tumbleweed;552400
Faster drivers that visibly enhance the user experience that would be good. But what else wil it provide? From what I gather there is a big advantage for those with a G-rex or toher similar bus board as they can potentially use other graphics cards. But for those without a bus board, other than potentially fatser drivers, there is not much else. Or am I mistaken?

Weed


One thing that would be interesting would be a native chipset driver that allows software written for CGX/P96 to run on AGA/ECS. Now, in CGX v3, the was an AGA driver that did indeed allow RTG software to work, but only software that would run on an 8-bit screen. It would seem that all it really did was to ensure PPC friendly alignment of BitMaps and implement the 8-bit pixel array read/write functions of cybergraphics.

Ever since experimenting with different EVD's for shapeshifter, an idea that has constantly intrigued me is a 'full' RTG driver AGA. One that is capable of performing RGB->HAM c2p for example, opening the possibility of running RTG software that requires an RGB display. In this model, RGB bitmaps would have be allocated in fast ram and blitting / WritePixelArray()ing them to screen would invoke the required c2p. Not sure how feasible this would be, but a logical extension to that would be that when opening a fake RGB screen, a fake Screen structure would be returned, hiding the true Screen (which would obviously be a HAM customscreen), where even the screen bitmap would be an RGB pixel buffer. Some process (perhaps triggered on vblank) would be responsible for updating changed areas on the real screen, using a delta buffer and/or using flags that can be set when any potentially destructive (ie can change the buffer) operation is invoked, for example calling any drawing functions or locking the bitmap.

It wouldn't be particularly fast, but shapeshifter demonstrated that the concept of RGB -> HAM c2p is possible outside of demos :)
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Will you support a new Unified Opensource RTG standart?
« Reply #6 on: April 11, 2010, 01:58:00 PM »
Which existing graphics cards for the Amiga have chipsets that support the VESA standards (and which version thereof)?
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Will you support a new Unified Opensource RTG standart?
« Reply #7 on: April 11, 2010, 03:03:54 PM »
Quote from: wawrzon;552973
@karlos:
but if we are going for vesa pci cards anyway, do we really need one already supported by amigaos drivers if gallium interfaces directly to the hw via vesa if i understood you right?

I was just asking, not steering. I just was thinking about where I'd begin if I had to start out from scratch. VESA has been around a long time and I suspect even the older cards (read Cirrus Logic based) may support it.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Will you support a new Unified Opensource RTG standart?
« Reply #8 on: April 12, 2010, 07:29:06 PM »
Quote from: bernd_afa;553173
Vesa is only a function set to open/close  a screen on a specific resolution.I guess to use it you need a X86 CPU.
but to give usefull speed you need a bitblit command for the GFX Card, that can copy blocks on the GFX Card fast and also a rectfill command.


VESA is more than just opening a screenmode. VESA 1.0 may have been limited to setting the resolution and timing, but remember it's currently at version 3 or something.

Check the VESA/AF standard. It specifies hardware accelerated rasterization of primitives, bit blitting and the usual gamut of 2D operations.
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Will you support a new Unified Opensource RTG standart?
« Reply #9 on: April 12, 2010, 10:37:30 PM »
Is it 3D acceleration in VESA 3 or just that it exposes accelerated operations in general?

I had the documentation here someplace. Never print anything out if you actually intend to read it :lol:
int p; // A