Re: [PATCH win-vdagent] Provide support for Windows CCD API

[Dmitry Fleytman <dmitry@xxxxxxxxxx>]

From: Javier Celaya <javier.celaya@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH win-vdagent] Provide support for Windows CCD API
To: spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


Hi,

El mié, 03-08-2016 a las 04:57 -0400, Frediano Ziglio escribió:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 11:35:56AM +0300, Sameeh Jubran wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > We've already looked into those patches (Javier's patches) and
> > > tested them.
> >
> > Ah ok, I must have missed your answer to Javier's series.
> >
> > > We found that on the contrary to our patches,
> > > multi-monitor support and arbitrary resolution do not work with
> > > the patches
> > > posted by Javier. Even though arbitrary resolution
> > > resolution is implemented in Javier's patches, it is not fully
> > > arbitrary.

And full arbitrary resolution would be too complicated to add on top of
Javier's series, hence the decision to go with an entirely different
series? Sorry for the basic questions, I'm really not familiar with
Windows API :)

Christophe



Not at all. I did not implement multi-monitor support because that
required to break the interface with the last kernel driver version at
that moment (it only supported one operation, setting an arbitrary
resolution). So it is only a matter of writing the new escapes.

On the other hand, I limited arbitrary resolutions to even sizes
because, again, that was what the kernel driver was doing at that
moment. That restriction is gone now, so my code can be adjusted to
really arbitrary resolutions.

Hi Javier,

First of all, I’m sorry for the mess created with this submission, that was not intentional

and we’re doing everything possible for fix it.

Patches we are submitting now already support these 2 features,

and we are going to submit corresponding driver patches as soon as this series get accepted.

We also did a few improvements on top of this patches (see RFC pathes I sent a few days ago),

that will be submitted as well.

If I understand correctly, at that point you’ll be able to rebase your work

on top of these patches and get the same functionality you have now + additional features.

Do you have any problem with this approach?

Thanks,

Dmitry

Frediano

_______________________________________________
Spice-devel mailing list
Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel


_______________________________________________
Spice-devel mailing list
Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel

-- 

Respectfully,

Sameeh Jubran

Linkedin

Junior Software Engineer @ Daynix.

_______________________________________________
Spice-devel mailing list
Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel