mir on mir questions :)

[Alexandros Frantzis]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 12:32:06PM +0300, Alexandros Frantzis wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:30:30AM +0300, Eleni Maria Stea wrote:
> > Hello everyone!
> > I started working on a nested mir a couple of days ago and I have some
> > questions for you after today's meeting. Actually, I am looking for a
> > starting point because there are many things to be done and I am not
> > sure what's a priority and what not...

Hi all,

we [1] had a discussion today about the best way to move forward. Here
is a summary of the plan:

Implement a NestedPlatform that will provide its own Display
implementation (NestedDisplay), but will internally depend on a native
platform instance to provide most of the other components (e.g., the
buffer allocator).

In order to achieve this we need to ensure that native platforms can be
created in a way that is compatible with nested functioning (e.g. the
GBM platform shouldn't try to become the DRM master in the nested case).

In each build of libmirserver, both the native platform and the
NestedPlatform will be included. Access to the these platforms will be
provided through factory functions (tentative names/parameters):

mg::create_native_platform();
mg::create_nested_platform();
mg::create_native_platform_nested(MirPlatformPackage const&);

The last function is going to be used by the NestedPlatform to create a
properly configured native platform for internal use.

As noted in a previous email, the users of libmirserver will be able to
select either the native or the nested platform at configuration time
(think system and session compositors, respectively).

Questions/comments welcome!

Thanks,
Alexandros

[1] Eleni, Alan and I