[directfb-dev] Re: [RFC][PATCH] Interlaced field parity

[Billy Biggs <vektor@dumbterm.net>]

Denis Oliver Kropp (dok@directfb.org):

> Quoting Ville Syrj?l? (syrjala@sci.fi):
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 04:42:23PM +0100, Denis Oliver Kropp wrote:
> > > > Should IDirectFBDisplayLayer::WaitForSync respect this too?
> > > 
> > > Does it sync on each field?
> > 
> > Yes. WaitForSync() is more useful for single buffering so I'm not
> > really sure if there's any reason making this change. Then again why
> > would the user set DLOP_FIELD_PARITY and use WaitForSync() for both
> > fields. Anyone have useful scenarios to support either choice?
> 
> I think WaitForSync() should sync on the second field only if
> DLOP_FIELD_PARITY is set, because the Flip() is done each two fields,
> too.

  When generating interlaced content I'd still like an interrupt every
field, even if I'm buffering 4 frames worth.  So, maybe two Wait calls
are needed?

  Oh, and one question about this patch.  Can I change whether the frame
is top-field-first or bottom-field-first while playing, and what does it
mean?  Ideally I'd like to be able to have MPEG2's repeat_first_field
capability, where I give a frame that's top field first, switch to
bottom field first, then have the next flip happen after 3 fields are
shown.  Yea yea?

-- 
Billy Biggs
vektor@dumbterm.net


-- 
Info:  To unsubscribe send a mail to ecartis@directfb.org with 
"unsubscribe directfb-dev" as subject.