On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 11:03:07PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> > @@ -1114,6 +1126,10 @@ int drm_plane_set_primary(struct drm_device *dev, struct drm_plane *plane, > >> > >> > >> fwiw, this comment probably belongs in #1/4 but: > >> > >> you probably don't need to introduce drm_plane_set_primary().. > >> instead you could just rename the 'bool priv' to 'bool prim'. I think > >> there are just three drivers using primary planes.. I'm not 100% sure > >> about exynos, but both omap and msm, the private plane == primary > >> plane. At least it was the intention to morph that into primary > >> planes. > > > > I'd like to handle cursors with this eventually as well, so I'm not sure > > whether just changing the meaning of priv by itself will get us > > everything we need. It seems like we probably need to provide a whole > > lot more information about the capabilities and limitations of each > > plane at drm_plane_init() and then expose those all as plane > > properties so that userspace knows what it can and can't do. In theory > > we could expose cursor planes exactly the same way we expose > > "traditional" planes today as long as we made sufficient plane > > properties available to userspace to describe the min/max size > > limitations and such. > > We could also just go the opposite direction, ie. keep _set_primary() > and drop the 'priv' arg.. I don't really mind too much either way, but > the 'private' plane stuff was intended to eventually be exposed to > userspace.. so if we call it primary now (which is a much better > name, IMO), we should clean out the remaining references to 'private'. Ah, I had the same comment in patch 1/4. Why not have drm_init_plane() take the type of plane as the last argument then? (instead of bool primary, just the plane_type enum, primary, "sprite", cursor). -- Damien _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
