Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: Replace drm_framebuffer plane size functions with its equivalents

2023-07-19 Thread Maxime Ripard
Hi, On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 04:04:43PM -0300, Carlos wrote: > On 7/12/23 20:30, André Almeida wrote: > > Hi Carlos, > > > > Em 27/06/2023 15:22, Carlos Eduardo Gallo Filho escreveu: > > [...] > > > > > > So, replace each drm_framebuffer_plane_{width,height} and > > > fb_plane_{width,height}

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: Replace drm_framebuffer plane size functions with its equivalents

2023-07-17 Thread Carlos
Hi André, thanks for review! On 7/12/23 20:30, André Almeida wrote: Hi Carlos, Em 27/06/2023 15:22, Carlos Eduardo Gallo Filho escreveu: [...] So, replace each drm_framebuffer_plane_{width,height} and fb_plane_{width,height} call to drm_format_info_plane_{width,height} and remove them. I

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: Replace drm_framebuffer plane size functions with its equivalents

2023-07-12 Thread André Almeida
Hi Carlos, Em 27/06/2023 15:22, Carlos Eduardo Gallo Filho escreveu: [...] So, replace each drm_framebuffer_plane_{width,height} and fb_plane_{width,height} call to drm_format_info_plane_{width,height} and remove them. I see that with this replace, there's a small code change from

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: Replace drm_framebuffer plane size functions with its equivalents

2023-06-27 Thread Carlos Eduardo Gallo Filho
The functions drm_framebuffer_plane{width,height} and fb_plane_{width,height} do exactly the same job of its equivalents drm_format_info_plane_{width,height} from drm_fourcc. The only reason to have these functions on drm_framebuffer would be if they would added a abstraction layer to call it