Commit 921d0548 authored by Simon Ser's avatar Simon Ser Committed by Derek Foreman

protocol: prefer wl_surface.damage_buffer

This commit makes wl_surface.damage_buffer preferred over wl_surface.damage.
wl_surface.damage can be implemented in a non-optimal way by the compositor
(e.g. by always damaging the whole buffer).

Having two requests makes it complicated for the compositor to handle damage,
making it necessary to transform one into the other's coordinates.

Moreover, integration with wp_viewporter is tricky.
Signed-off-by: Simon Ser's avatarSimon Ser <contact@emersion.fr>
Acked-by: Pekka Paalanen's avatarPekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Derek Foreman's avatarDerek Foreman <derek.foreman.samsung@gmail.com>
parent 905c0a34
Pipeline #10723 passed with stage
in 1 minute and 50 seconds
...@@ -1397,9 +1397,9 @@ ...@@ -1397,9 +1397,9 @@
and clears pending damage. The server will clear the current and clears pending damage. The server will clear the current
damage as it repaints the surface. damage as it repaints the surface.
Alternatively, damage can be posted with wl_surface.damage_buffer Note! New clients should not use this request. Instead damage can be
which uses buffer coordinates instead of surface coordinates, posted with wl_surface.damage_buffer which uses buffer coordinates
and is probably the preferred and intuitive way of doing this. instead of surface coordinates.
</description> </description>
<arg name="x" type="int" summary="surface-local x coordinate"/> <arg name="x" type="int" summary="surface-local x coordinate"/>
<arg name="y" type="int" summary="surface-local y coordinate"/> <arg name="y" type="int" summary="surface-local y coordinate"/>
......
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment