| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
RE: [Xen-devel] [RFC] Xen Virtual Framebuffer
And as another also: a big usability benefit of having the framebuffer is
that users don't have to have a working network or install any extra
software. It's just a transparency thing; you don't really *need* it but it
makes domUs behave more like "proper" machines.
It should also give better performance, as James mentioned. Eventually,
it'd be nice to support accelerated OpenGL in domUs but that may be some
way off.
Cheers,
Mark
On Dec 6 2005, James Harper wrote:
Some things just work better when you can enable shared memory
extensions under X, which obviously can't be done over the network.
Also, X isn't the only thing that can make use of a framebuffer.
James
-----Original Message-----
From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xen-devel-
bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jon Smirl
Sent: Tuesday, 6 December 2005 11:36
To: Anthony Liguori
Cc: xen-devel
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC] Xen Virtual Framebuffer
I haven't tried playing with X and Xen, but why doesn't it work to
just treat the multiple domains like a network? You run X in dom0 and
give it full access to the video hardware. Then you ssh into each
domain and start X apps, just like you do when using X remotely.
OpenGL will even work this way and be accelerated (as soon as X fixes
indirect acceleration). This model should let you get apps up from
each domain simultaneously on the X display in dom0.
--
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home