The case of the case.


It's not just matter of getting used to it. Not everyone has same size hands.
I mapped the enter key to the emulated DS start button in DraStic just as an alternative but in practice I use it for start a lot more than Pandora's start button because it's a lot easier to reach.

But I do have very small hands.
 
Looking good, ED! Can't wait to see some more pics of the first printed case and the next PCB revision. I'm a sucker for hardware porn. :wub:
 
IIRC someone said somewhere that the chip is not capable of doing 1080p
That was a direct answer to the post before, where someone asked wether a 1080p version of the rotation/scaling chip was available, not a statement regarding a final decision - resolution wise.
 
That was a direct answer to the post before, where someone asked wether a 1080p version of the rotation/scaling chip was available, not a statement regarding a final decision - resolution wise.
And Levi never said that EvilDragon claimed they were not an option. He said that they weren't an option, which is essentially a true statement, because that is the reality of the situation until we either:

A] Find out how to do faster rotation on OMAP

or

B] Switch to a chipset that doesn't have this rotation problem

-God Ginrai
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And Levi never said that EvilDragon claimed they were not an option. He said that they weren't an option, which is essentially a true statement, because that is the reality of the situation until we either:

A] Find out how to do faster rotation on OMAP

or

B] Switch to a chipset that doesn't have this rotation problem

-God Ginrai
I wanted an answer from ED (or Nikolaus) about that topic, not someone stating the obvious.I don't get why you quoted my last post, wouldn't quoting my response to levy make more sense ?
 
A] Find out how to do faster rotation on OMAP

or

B] Switch to a chipset that doesn't have this rotation problem
C] stay with the portrait display and let the rotation to be handled by the X-Server or apps themselves.
This option is probably easiest for hardware/OS but makes developing and porting apps harder as well as potential Pandora compatibility layer.
 
C] stay with the portrait display and let the rotation to be handled by the X-Server or apps themselves.
 I thought that option was ruled out because it was too slow, so far ?
I thought the problem with this option is that there is a lot of stuff that does not use the X-Server (> everything that writes directly to the framebuffer), leading back to option "A", God Ginrai presented
Edit: too slow
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's another problem you mention.

The X-Server has rotation included and only updates the part of the screen that changes, so it's usable with rotation.

The more things happen at once, the more slower it will get.

Besides the slowness, all games NOT using the X Server will need to be changed to rotate as well.

So it's two issues you're talking about here.
 
This has been asked before but I don't recall seeing an answer - Could one of the (otherwise mostly unused) M4s be tasked with dedicated framebuffer rotation duties?

- Neelix
 
This has been asked before but I don't recall seeing an answer - Could one of the (otherwise mostly unused) M4s be tasked with dedicated framebuffer rotation duties?

- Neelix
Maybe, but that wouldn't solve the problem: the bottleneck is not doing the computation (which is trivial), but the memory operations: at 60Hz, reading and writing a full framebuffer takes a significant portion of the available memory bandwidth, and the speed at which you can do it is bounded by the speed of the memory. So it does not matter whether you do it on an A15 core, an M4, the DSP or the GPU -- the problem will remain (the only exception being GL|ES applications, where you can avoid the problem by making the GPU render everything rotated).

The dedicated chip solves the problem by having its own RAM, enough to store an entire frame, so from the point of view of the SoC, it is as if the screen is a landscape one. At least that's my understanding.
 
I don't get why you quoted my last post, wouldn't quoting my response to levy make more sense ?
Not really. It was in your post to LEOXD that you insinuated that they were telling you that EvilDragon decided to skip it completely. I quoted your most recent post simply because it was part of the same line of discussion.

-God Ginrai
 
This has been asked before but I don't recall seeing an answer - Could one of the (otherwise mostly unused) M4s be tasked with dedicated framebuffer rotation duties?

- Neelix
Without even knowing the clock speed it's impossible to guess. If they can sustain 1 load or store per cycle with a bunch of ldm/stm instructions you'd need a minimum of 110.6MHz. In practice I doubt they could get anywhere close to this since they probably aren't really designed to be able to stream memory as fast as possible. Even the Cortex-A15 apparently struggles to get anywhere close to peak bandwidth and it has hardware prefetching while the M4s probably don't.
 
Oh man hoffentlich hab ich am 10 Mai zeit *_*

Werden an dem Tag auch ein paar Pandoras, mal so zum testen ausgestellt?
 
Back
Top