[vbox-dev] VirtualBox without 3D acceleration enabled vs self compiled Mesa

[Divick Kishore]

>
>> Could someone please help me understand why there is huge difference
>> in s/w only rendering path with self compiled mesa vs mesa installed
>> on system? Moreover the mesa renderer shown with self compiled mesa vs
>> the one installed on system show different renderer. Could someone
>> please explain if the Gallium on LLVM renderer is a s/w only path or
>> does it utilize the GPU as well?
>
> [...]
> Do I understand correctly that you are comparing the speed of software
> rendering with a distribution-built Mesa and your own build, and that you
> are not interested in pass-through (i.e. hardware accelerated on the host)


Yeah that is what I am trying to do. I just want to build and measure
the performance of software only path.

> here?  If so then you are probably better asking the people who built the
> distribution package.
>

Alright.

> To my knowledge, the Gallium on LLVM renderer is software-only, though many
> open source GPU drivers do make use of LLVM (ours doesn't).
>

As per this link http://www.mesa3d.org/vmware-guest.html (which seems
to be quite old though), VMware guest GL driver for 3D acceleration
has the following renderer string:

OpenGL vendor string: VMware, Inc.
OpenGL renderer string: Gallium 0.4 on SVGA3D; build: RELEASE;
OpenGL version string: 2.1 Mesa 8.0

while on my machine the renderer is Chromium. Why is there this
difference? Has there been a change in the way 3D acceleration is
achieved in latest VirtualBox guest drivers vs the old ones?

Thanks & Regards,
Divick