Noralf Trønnes <[email protected]> writes: > Den 12.07.2017 15.46, skrev Noralf Trønnes: >> Add a library for drivers that can use a simple representation >> of a GEM backed framebuffer. >> >> Signed-off-by: Noralf Trønnes <[email protected]> >> --- > > This patch adds a gem backed drm_framebuffer like this: > > struct drm_fb_gem { > /** > * @base: Base DRM framebuffer > */ > struct drm_framebuffer base; > /** > * @obj: GEM object array backing the framebuffer. One object per > * plane. > */ > struct drm_gem_object *obj[4]; > }; > > Now I wonder if it would be better to extend drm_framebuffer instead: > > struct drm_framebuffer { > + /** > + * @obj: GEM objects backing the framebuffer, one per plane (optional). > + */ > + struct drm_gem_object *obj[4]; > };
FWIW, I would love to see this tried. I think we would end up with some nice cleanups if we did so.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
