On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 9:12 AM Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 21:45:14 +0100 > Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 7:55 PM James Park <james.park@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > The trailing underscore for DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE_ isn't > > > intentional, right? Should I put all the integer types, or just the > > > ones that are used in that file? > > > > Yeah that trailing _ just slipped in. And I'd just do the types > > already used. I don't think anything else than __u32 (for drm fourcc) > > and __u64 (for drm modifier) is needed. > > Hi, > > can that create conflicts if userspace first includes drm_fourcc.h and > then drm.h? > > I would find it natural to userspace have generic headers including > drm_fourcc.h and then DRM-specific C-files including drm.h as well > (through libdrm headers). I think Weston might already do this. > > The generic userspace (weston) header would obviously #define > DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE, because it is used by non-DRM C-files as well. Hm yes that would break. I guess we could just include the linux types header for this. And I guess on windows you'd need to have that from somewhere. Or we just require that users of the standalone header pull the right header or defines in first? -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
