On Thursday 18 April 2013 17:06:57 Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 03:43:23PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Wednesday 17 April 2013 22:18:01 ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > > > > tests/modetest/buffers.c | 9 ++++++--- > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/tests/modetest/buffers.c b/tests/modetest/buffers.c > > > index 5086381..6b117b4 100644 > > > --- a/tests/modetest/buffers.c > > > +++ b/tests/modetest/buffers.c > > > @@ -601,7 +601,7 @@ fill_smpte(const struct format_info *info, void > > > *planes[3], unsigned int width, #define BLUE 0 > > > > > > static void > > > > > > -make_pwetty(void *data, int width, int height, int stride) > > > +make_pwetty(void *data, int width, int height, int stride, int rgb16) > > > > What about passing the format 4cc instead ? > > It's a bit more work since I need to pass the whole format_info > down from fill_tiles(). But I can make a v2 with that change. It was just an idea to make the code more future-proof, in case we decide to make 24-bit formats pwetty at some point. Maybe a bpp value would be a good compromise ? -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
