On 2018-04-10 11:24 AM, Emil Velikov wrote:
> On 10 April 2018 at 09:27, Michel Dänzer <michel at daenzer.net> wrote:
>> On 2018-04-04 04:29 PM, Emil Velikov wrote:
>>> From: Emil Velikov <emil.velikov at collabora.com>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <emil.velikov at collabora.com>
>>> ---
>>> src/amdgpu_probe.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/src/amdgpu_probe.c b/src/amdgpu_probe.c
>>> index 075e5c1..e65c83b 100644
>>> --- a/src/amdgpu_probe.c
>>> +++ b/src/amdgpu_probe.c
>>> @@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ static int amdgpu_kernel_open_fd(ScrnInfoPtr pScrn,
>>> char *busid;
>>> int fd;
>>>
>>> -#ifdef XF86_PDEV_SERVER_FD
>>> +#ifdef ODEV_ATTRIB_FD
>>> if (platform_dev) {
>>> fd = xf86_get_platform_device_int_attrib(platform_dev,
>>> ODEV_ATTRIB_FD, -1);
>>>
>>
>> ODEV_ATTRIB_FD doesn't seem obviously more "correct" than
>> XF86_PDEV_SERVER_FD, since both were added in the same xserver commit,
>> and the latter might be helpful for understanding this is related to the
>> other code guarded by XF86_PDEV_SERVER_FD.
>>
> All the XF86_PDEV_SERVER_FD code is dropped with a later commit ;-)
> I could move this patch just after said commit, or you prefer to keep
> the original guard?
The latter, less churn. :)
--
Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com
Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer
