On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 5:11 PM, Keith Packard <kei...@keithp.com> wrote:
> Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> writes:
>
> > Sometimes the best way to review a patch is with another patch. :-) I'm
> > not sure what you think of this approach but I didn't really relish the
> > idea of having 3 get_capabilities entrypoints. With these two patches,
> > we're now down to one. In order to implement VK_EXT_display_control, all
> > you have to do is add support in wsi_display_surface_get_capabilities2
> for
> > the little chain-in struct and off we go.
>
> I like this plan. Some comments below.
>
> > + VkSurfaceCapabilities2KHR caps2 = {
> > + .sType = VK_STRUCTURE_TYPE_SURFACE_CAPABILITIES_2_KHR,
> > + .pNext = &counters,
> > + };
>
> I'd like to see an explicit initialization of the
> supported_surface_counters field here to make it clear that a WSI layer
> that doesn't look for this structure will end up using the right value (0).
>
C99 guarantees that, one one field is initialized with a designated
initializer then all fields not explicitly initialized get
zero-initialized. I can add it if you'd like none the less.
> > +/* This is guaranteed to not collide with anything because it's in the
> > + * VK_KHR_swapchain namespace but not actually used by the extension.
> > + */
> > +#define VK_STRUCTURE_TYPE_WSI_SURFACE_SUPPORTED_COUNTERS_MESA \
> > + (VkStructureType)1000001005
>
> This should probably be at the top of wsi_common.h with the other
> structure type values so we don't accidentally re-use this value.
>
Sure.
--Jason
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
