On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Jeff McGee <jeff.mcgee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 01:58:52PM -0400, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Jeff McGee <jeff.mcgee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 08:37:30AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 04:41:02PM -0700, jeff.mcgee@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >> >> > From: Jeff McGee <jeff.mcgee@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> > >> >> > tests/core_getparams needs the new libdrm interfaces for >> >> > querying subslice and EU counts. >> >> > >> >> > For: VIZ-4636 >> >> > Signed-off-by: Jeff McGee <jeff.mcgee@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> > --- >> >> > configure.ac | 2 +- >> >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> > >> >> > diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac >> >> > index 16d6a2e..88a1c3d 100644 >> >> > --- a/configure.ac >> >> > +++ b/configure.ac >> >> > @@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ if test "x$GCC" = "xyes"; then >> >> > fi >> >> > AC_SUBST(ASSEMBLER_WARN_CFLAGS) >> >> > >> >> > -PKG_CHECK_MODULES(DRM, [libdrm_intel >= 2.4.52 libdrm]) >> >> > +PKG_CHECK_MODULES(DRM, [libdrm_intel >= 2.4.60 libdrm]) >> >> >> >> Please don't and instead copypaste the new structs/defines with a local_ >> >> prefix like we do it for all the other new igt testcases. Forcing libdrm >> >> to get updated for igt all the time can get annoying fast. >> >> -Daniel >> >> >> > In this case I'm trying to exercise new API functions in libdrm which >> > wrap the GETPARAM ioctl. Would you rather me bypass the wrapper to >> > avoid requiring updated libdrm? I can do that, but it fails to test the >> > complete path that client would use. >> >> >> Am I missing something, or does 2.4.60 not exist yet? >> >> That said dependency bumps for igt seem like less of an issue than >> dependency bumps for mesa.. I mean if you are using igt you are >> probably on the latest anyways.. I'm not sure why Daniel is so >> concerned about that.. >> >> (but dependency bumps to something that doesn't exist yet should >> perhaps be avoided) >> >> BR, >> -R >> > > Hi Rob. This igt change is contigent upon my libdrm changes which > would in fact bump that version to 2.4.60 after adding an API. That > change is also posted and waiting review. I guess I should have stated > that dependency here to begin with. > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2015-March/061101.html > ahh, my bad.. I hadn't read all of the threads.. sorry for the noise ;-) BR, -R > Jeff >> >> > -Jeff >> > >> >> > PKG_CHECK_MODULES(PCIACCESS, [pciaccess >= 0.10]) >> >> > PKG_CHECK_MODULES(OVERLAY_XVLIB, [xv x11 xext dri2proto >= 2.6], enable_overlay_xvlib=yes, enable_overlay_xvlib=no) >> >> > PKG_CHECK_MODULES(OVERLAY_XLIB, [cairo-xlib dri2proto >= 2.6], enable_overlay_xlib=yes, enable_overlay_xlib=no) >> >> > -- >> >> > 2.3.0 >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > Intel-gfx mailing list >> >> > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Daniel Vetter >> >> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation >> >> +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Beignet mailing list >> >> Beignet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/beignet >> > _______________________________________________ >> > dri-devel mailing list >> > dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel >> _______________________________________________ >> dri-devel mailing list >> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
