From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: 3d graphics (was Re: [9fans] A sad story and a question
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 10 Nov 2007 15:28:21 PST."
	<E5491081-5E04-4C34-A9E9-939B218E1DD8@telus.net> 
From: Bakul Shah <bakul+plan9@bitblocks.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:32:19 -0800
Message-Id: <20071112203219.74D145B3E@mail.bitblocks.com>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: f41a084a-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> Disclaimer: I work for Intel, in a graphics group tied closely to  
> GPUs.  All my words are mine, as are my opinions, and don't represent  
> Intel.
...
>                                            Instead I'd probably treat  
> the GPU as a remote machine, and use 9P to provide namespace in which  
> you could bind textures, vertex buffers, frame buffers, shaders, and  
> so on.  A control channel would be used to launch tasks using these  
> named resources. 

That seems like a lot of fun, but wouldn't it involve doing a
from-scratch design?  Or may be you are talking about a thin
layer that provides access to what a GPU based controller
provides?  Something on the level of DRI/DRM?  I'd be happy
if this can be done for even one graphics card.

May be then an openGL compatible layer can be added on top
for all the existing apps one'd like to port to Plan9.  I
don't foresee anyone doing a rewrite of google earth.