On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 03:46:09PM +0530, Sharma, Shashank wrote: > Hello Emil, > > Thanks for your time. > > I have got mixed opinion on this. > > IMHO we should expose them to userspace too, as UI agents like Hardware > composer/X/Wayland must know what does these > > flags means, so that they can display them on the end user screen (like > settings menu) > > But few people even think thats its too complex to be exposed to userspace > agents. > > So your suggestions are welcome. These are flags for the internal mode representation, not for the uapi one. They really don't belong into the uapi header, but instead into include/drm/drm_modes.h. I.e. I fully concur with Emil. -Daniel > > Regards > Shashank > > On 8/4/2016 3:12 PM, Emil Velikov wrote: > > On 3 August 2016 at 11:56, Shashank Sharma <shashank.sharma@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > --- a/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h > > > +++ b/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h > > > + > > > +/* Aspect ratio flag bitmask (4 bits 22:19) */ > > > +#define DRM_MODE_FLAG_PARMASK (0x0F<<19) > > > +#define DRM_MODE_FLAG_PARNONE \ > > > + (DRM_MODE_PICTURE_ASPECT_NONE << 19) > > > +#define DRM_MODE_FLAG_PAR4_3 \ > > > + (DRM_MODE_PICTURE_ASPECT_4_3 << 19) > > > +#define DRM_MODE_FLAG_PAR16_9 \ > > > + (DRM_MODE_PICTURE_ASPECT_16_9 << 19) > > > > > Afaict all these flags are internal/implementation specific thus we > > shouldn't expose them to userspace. Right ? > > > > -Emil > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
