2016-04-14 Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx>:
> 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..
Sure, I totally agree.
Gustavo
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
