Hi Thierry, On Monday 21 July 2014 14:55:23 Thierry Reding wrote: > On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 02:34:28PM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Jul 2014 14:16:42 +0200 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >> On Monday 21 July 2014 14:12:47 Thierry Reding wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 11:57:37AM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote: [snip] > >>>> The new drm_display_info structure should look like this [2] (except > >>>> that color_formats and bpc have not be removed yet), and [1] is just > >>>> here to show how the video_bus_format enum would look like. > >>>> > >>>> [1] http://code.bulix.org/rfd0yx-86557 > >>>> [2] http://code.bulix.org/7n03b4-86556 > >>> > >>> Quoting from your paste: > >>> + const enum video_bus_format *bus_formats; > >>> + int nbus_formats; > >>> > >>> Do we really need more than one? > >> > >> We do if we want to replace the color_formats and bpc fields. > > > > Yes, that's what I was about to answer :-). > > Maybe we don't need to replace color_formats and bpc field immediately. > That could be done in a follow-up patch. We don't need to replace them right now, but we should at least agree on how to replace them. Introducing a new field that would need to be replaced in the near future when removing color_formats and bpc would be a waste of time. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
