[+Daniel Vetter]
Hi Ankitprasad,
On 31 May 2016 at 07:19, <ankitprasad.r.sharma@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
Seems like you've picked the patch from the mailing list, which does
s/@/ at /. You might want to revert that and normalise the emails.
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> @@ -1011,6 +1011,23 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_get_aperture {
> * bytes
> */
> __u64 aper_available_size;
> +
> + /**
> + * Versioning to indicate if map_total_size and stolen_total_size
> + * value returned are valid or not
> + */
> + __u64 version;
> +
> + /**
> + * Total space in the mappable region of the aperture, in bytes
> + */
> + __u64 map_total_size;
> +
> + /**
> + * Total space in the stolen region, in bytes
> + */
> + __u64 stolen_total_size;
> +
I'm not sure if this is going to work with old userspace/new kernel
and vice-versa. Are you sure that things won't explode in such cases ?
Sadly this struct is missing flag field, so I'm not sure how one can
extend it without breaking things - Daniel, any ideas ?
I believe that when proposing UAPI changes one should point to the
relevant userspace patch set. Did I miss it or there isn't any ?
Regards,
Emil
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
