Code review comment for lp:~vanvugt/mir/predictive-bypass-v3
Revision history for this message
| Chris Halse Rogers (raof) wrote | # |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
bbfa235
(Get the code!)
Hmm. It seems that we've been unclear.
The active display wouldn't *drive* the MTC. It would just replace the "you should probably wait at least $X ms" data member with a "you should probably wait at least until I signal you" signal. The MTC can still choose to wait longer (if there has been no scene change) or less time if it wanted to.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Daniel van Vugt" <email address hidden>
Sent: 30/06/2015 16:49
To: "Daniel van Vugt" <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: [Merge] lp:~vanvugt/mir/predictive-bypass-v3 into lp:mir
I'm intentionally steering away from that right now. Because it's only an ideal time to post the next frame. Priority must still be given to the compositor which knows whether there needs to be a next frame at all. If nothing in the scene (or the "view") is changing then we need to stay asleep, and ignore what the recommended delay to the next frame is.
--
https:/
You are reviewing the proposed merge of lp:~vanvugt/mir/predictive-bypass-v3 into lp:mir.