On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 8:51 AM, Christian König <deathsim...@vodafone.de> wrote: > Am 21.04.2017 um 15:38 schrieb Emil Velikov: >> >> On 21 April 2017 at 13:31, Christian König <deathsim...@vodafone.de> >> wrote: >>> >>> Am 21.04.2017 um 14:11 schrieb Emil Velikov: >>>> >>>> Both headers are used everywhere, plus they both provide interop >>>> mechanism. >>>> >>>> Since they define [consecutive] VDPAU driver funcs, we really want the >>>> definitions side by side. Otherwise we risk clashing multiple functions >>>> at the same address. >>>> >>>> Cc: Christian König <christian.koe...@amd.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> >>> >>> >>> NAK, the seperation is intentional. vdpau_interop.h is the old one we >>> sooner >>> or later want to remove. >>> >> Right. How about we do a very rough ETA? >> We've have many parts that are we are about to nuke soon(tm) yet it >> never seems to happen. > > > I usually set a reminder a few years into the future for that. > > But enough kidding. I'm fine with removing it, but I think it would break > nouveau and I don't have any chance of testing that.
Is there a patch I should test? -ilia _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
