Backing out DRI2 from server 1.5

[Eric Anholt]

On Sun, 2008-08-10 at 19:11 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 5:46 AM, Kristian Høgsberg <krh at bitplanet.net> wrote:
> >
> >> My plan is to included a device specific 32 bit bitfield per buffer in
> >> the reply to DRI2Getbuffers, which is what the client calls to ask the
> >> server for buffer info.  These bits can indicate properties such as
> >> tiling.  In the DRI2Connect call, I'm sending back the DDX version, so
> >> the DRI driver will know which bits are valid.
> >
> > I actually meant to cc the lists on this, I dislike device specific
> > limited allocation bitfields
> > as an API in general, can we add something with a pointer or length + array?
> 
> I debated whether to just use a bitfield or send along an arbitrary
> sized device private block.  What's a little tricky about an opaque
> block is that we can't byteswap it in the protocol; we don't need
> that, of course, but it just feels a little icky.  More to the point,
> I could not come up with anything that would require more than just a
> few bits, and always including this bit field makes a lot of common
> cases much easier - tiling, interlacing, swizzling... I dunno?  What
> else might there be?  We can add another request if there ever is a
> need for more data.

For GEM I don't need tiling or swizzling information.  I just ask the
kernel what the answer is, since the DDX hadn't been telling me the
information I needed in the past.

-- 
Eric Anholt
eric at anholt.net                         eric.anholt at intel.com


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20080811/cbee0175/attachment.pgp>