On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 9:29 PM, Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> This flag tells drm_atomic_ioctl that we want to get a per-crtc out-fence
> fd back.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h b/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h
> index 7a7856e..39905cc 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h
> @@ -582,13 +582,15 @@ struct drm_mode_destroy_dumb {
> #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_TEST_ONLY 0x0100
> #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_NONBLOCK 0x0200
> #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET 0x0400
> +#define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_OUT_FENCE 0x0800
>
> #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_FLAGS (\
> DRM_MODE_PAGE_FLIP_EVENT |\
> DRM_MODE_PAGE_FLIP_ASYNC |\
> DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_TEST_ONLY |\
> DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_NONBLOCK |\
> - DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET)
> + DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET |\
> + DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_OUT_FENCE)
just to be pedantic / bisectable, perhaps this should be squashed in
to patch that actually starts using this flag? Otherwise there is an
intermediate state in git where the flag is accepted but ignored..
BR,
-R
> struct drm_mode_atomic {
> __u32 flags;
> --
> 2.5.5
>
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
