> @@ -1765,14 +1765,6 @@ void igt_plane_set_fb(igt_plane_t *plane, struct
> igt_fb *fb)
> plane->fb = fb;
> /* hack to keep tests working that don't call igt_plane_set_size() */
> if (fb) {
> - plane->crtc_w = fb->width;
> - plane->crtc_h = fb->height;
> - } else {
> - plane->crtc_w = 0;
> - plane->crtc_h = 0;
> - }
> -
> - if (fb) {
> /* set default plane pos/size as fb size */
> plane->crtc_x = 0;
> plane->crtc_y = 0;
> @@ -1784,6 +1776,9 @@ void igt_plane_set_fb(igt_plane_t *plane, struct
> igt_fb *fb)
> fb->src_y = 0;
> fb->src_w = fb->width;
> fb->src_h = fb->height;
> + } else {
> + plane->crtc_w = 0;
> + plane->crtc_h = 0;
> }
Existing code is simply setting fb src position and plane crtc position to 0s (top left)
and src size as fb size and crtc size as plane size to start a fb with a plane. Then individual
test can change them to whatever fb position/size and plane position/size as it wants.
As I commented to 3/4 patch, if these initializations are removed, then all tests to be
updated to explicitly set them.
As a side note, is there any reason for having two patches 2/4 and 3/4 modifying
same lines of code instead of a single patch?
>
> plane->fb_changed = true;
> --
> 2.3.5
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
