WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Xen

xen-devel

[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Virtual frame buffer: frontend

To: "Markus Armbruster" <armbru@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Virtual frame buffer: frontend
From: "Christian Limpach" <christian.limpach@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 2006年7月10日 11:57:22 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: 2006年7月10日 03:57:43 -0700
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Fy0wcHaJ9369iLUM6VDlL52hHK629TTlNLuu0wNS8VevfubR21TWD8ZzlQixbiRx9cH03r5Di4x9Mlf02L5a/m0dP/mCZp2EGiu2RxGRPQSL5J03OuPRy6jyjvfz2NsBUlsUIKqhlmlg7EmSjZZ0tfU4zlBpJ1R+AJW7NEU7Qvg=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <87veq5syfx.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <87ac80ghox.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <8764ioghnn.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3d8eece20607070945saad66c2hfc29b765db0c06bc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <87veq5syfx.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Christian.Limpach@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 7/10/06, Markus Armbruster <armbru@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Additionally, I think that the dirty region protocol doesn't really
> perform too well in quite simple usage cases like having video play in
> one corner of the screen and the mouse being moved in the opposite
> corner. It's probably good enough for this version and supporting
> this protocol in the future isn't too bad.
There's been some discussion on this. I'm not sure what bottom line
emerged, if any. Do we have to improve this before it can be merged?
Or before it can be declared stable? Or just eventually? Unless it's
the latter: do we already know in which direction to go?
I think the current stuff is good enough and the current protocol is
not hard to support even if we have something better in the future,
i.e. a guest using the current protocol is easy to support in a
backend which also supports smarter ways of passing dirty region
information.
Thank you for working on this!
 christian
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date: [Xen-devel] VMX status report 10648:30cdeb686b93 , Zheng, Jeff
Next by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] how to disable the NX flag in a domU? , Hans-Christian Armingeon
Previous by Thread: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Virtual frame buffer: frontend , Markus Armbruster
Next by Thread: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Virtual frame buffer: frontend , Markus Armbruster
Indexes: [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]

Copyright ©, Citrix Systems Inc. All rights reserved. Legal and Privacy
Citrix This site is hosted by Citrix

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /