On Mit, 2002-11-06 at 18:04, Keith Packard wrote: > Around 16 o'clock on Nov 6, Michel =?ISO-8859-1?Q?D=E4nzer?= wrote: > > > Okay, is there anything wrong with turning the struct for the ioctl into > > a union of a request and a reply struct? :) > > That is the usual way, I believe... Or, you can just build a larger > struct containing both pieces. > > > Yes. The blocking ioctl also returns a timestamp, is that important for > > the signal? > > Might be nice; there's plenty of space. Is it expensive to compute? > > > Oh, and BTW, is it okay for the ioctl to trigger a single signal, or > > would it have to generate signals indefinitely? > > Might want a mode that chose between these two options, but if I had to > pick one, I'd ask for a single signal. That's what SYNC wants.
http://penguinppc.org/~daenzer/DRI/radeon-vbl-signal.diff is an attempt at this, unfortunately not successful - it locks up solid when I request a signal to be delivered. Now I'd very much like to get this into 4.3.0, so I'd appreciate someone pointing out the stupid mistake(s) I'm probably making. :) -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
