On ti, 2016-07-26 at 10:49 -0400, Sean Paul wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 3:00 AM, Joonas Lahtinen > <joonas.lahtinen at linux.intel.com> wrote: > > diff --git a/include/drm/drm_crtc.h b/include/drm/drm_crtc.h > > index 3edeaf8..57bbc61 100644 > > --- a/include/drm/drm_crtc.h > > +++ b/include/drm/drm_crtc.h > > @@ -84,13 +84,13 @@ static inline uint64_t I642U64(int64_t val) > > Â * DRM_REFLECT_Y reflects the image along the specified axis prior to > > rotation > > Â */ > > Â #define DRM_ROTATE_MASK 0x0f > > -#define DRM_ROTATE_0Â Â Â 0 > > -#define DRM_ROTATE_90Â Â 1 > > -#define DRM_ROTATE_180 2 > > -#define DRM_ROTATE_270 3 > > +#define DRM_ROTATE_0Â Â Â BIT(0) > > +#define DRM_ROTATE_90Â Â BIT(1) > > +#define DRM_ROTATE_180 BIT(2) > > +#define DRM_ROTATE_270 BIT(3) > > Â #define DRM_REFLECT_MASK (~DRM_ROTATE_MASK) > It's probably a good time to give these masks a little love. Could we > just generate them (both ROTATE and REFLECT) from the ROTATE and > REFLECT values now?
I was consider it too, so I think it would be an OK change. Fine with the patch otherwise? I can send a revised version with that changed. Regards, Joonas > > Sean > > > > > -#define DRM_REFLECT_XÂ Â 4 > > -#define DRM_REFLECT_YÂ Â 5 > > +#define DRM_REFLECT_XÂ Â BIT(4) > > +#define DRM_REFLECT_YÂ Â BIT(5) > > > > Â enum drm_connector_force { > > Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â DRM_FORCE_UNSPECIFIED, > > -- > > 2.5.5 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dri-devel mailing list > > dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Joonas Lahtinen Open Source Technology Center Intel Corporation