Hi, On 12 January 2017 at 18:11, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 05:50:15PM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: >> struct drm_plane { >> struct { >> uint32_t format; >> uint64_t modifiers[]; >> } formats[]; >> } > > Flipping formats[] vs. modifiers[] here would seem like it should make > this easier with the proposed kernel API. And if the kernel will also > uarantee that multiple instances of the same modifier must be returned > contiguously, then it should be even easier. > > Oh and flipping formats[] and modifiers[] should also save a quite a > bit of space since each format takes twice as much space as each > modifier. But I suppose that might come at a runtime cost if you have > to look for a specific format in each modifier's format list instead > of having to look at just the modifier list of a specific format. So > I suppose not flipping might be better after all, which I guess would > complicate populating the infromation somewhat. > > Anyways, that's all a bit unrelated to the matter at hand, so I'll stop > now and just state that I don't mind having an explicit offset if > people really want it. It would make sense, but then gbm_surface_create_with_modifiers takes a fixed pixel format and a list of acceptable modifiers (which to me seems like the right way around as an API), so whenever I was creating a surface, I'd have to walk through and create a new list, flipped back the other way. Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel