[PATCH] dix: fix wrong condition checking for attached slave (#44003)

We need to update the master if the device is not a master _and_ it is not floating. Triggered since 51437995a5041a8c53c33b508b1607c78a5fa463, introduced in dc57f89959e549403f8488eb9f23425bd7118b22. X.Org Bug 44003 Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer

[PATCH 2/2] dix: on PointerRootWin send a FocusIn to the sprite window too

XTS XSetDeviceFocus-7 Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer --- dix/enterleave.c |3 +++ 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/dix/enterleave.c b/dix/enterleave.c index 2b8c7c5..89a82ab 100644 --- a/dix/enterleave.c +++ b/dix/enterleave.c @@ -1299,7 +1299,10 @@ DeviceFocusEv

[PATCH v2 1/2] dix: send focus events to the immediate parent (#44079)

For a transition from windows A to B, A->parent did not receive an event. DeviceFocusOutEvents sends to windows ]from, to[, so start with the actual window, not it's parent. X.Org Bug 44079 Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer --- Changes to v1: - now

Re: [PATCH XTS 2/2] xts5: remove (type *)NULL casts

On 01/04/12 21:01, Peter Hutterer wrote: --- a/xts5/XI/XGetDeviceKeyMapping.m +++ b/xts5/XI/XGetDeviceKeyMapping.m @@ -267,8 +267,8 @@ int SymsPerCode = 6; CHECKPASS(1); >>ASSERTION def ->># I'm not sure what you could do here, its just saying that there is ->># a reserved val

Re: [PATCH XTS 1/2] xts5: remove some more gevent() unnecessities

On 01/04/12 21:01, Peter Hutterer wrote: Don't declare where not needed, include stdlib where needed, don't cast where not necessary. Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer Reviewed-by: Alan Coopersmith ...except for the typo in the subject line, which made me think it was a glib event loop call. --

[PATCH XTS 2/2] xts5: fix XSetDeviceFocus-5

t003() selects for key events on the root window. t005() takes over and then complains when the focus correctly follows the pointer and an event is delivered to the root window. If you don't expect events on the root window, unselect them first. Submitting a NULL mask to XSelectExtensionEvents doe

[PATCH XTS 1/2] xts5: Fix XSetDeviceFocus-4

XDeviceKeyEvent and XKeyEvent are _not_ binary compatible. Expecting a random byte location inside the device event to be of the value it'd have in a core event is an amusing pasttime, but highly inappropriate for a test. Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer --- xts5/XI/XSetDeviceFocus.m | 36 +++

[PATCH XTS 1/2] xts5: remove some more gevent() unnecessities

Don't declare where not needed, include stdlib where needed, don't cast where not necessary. Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer --- xts5/Xlib12/XDisplayName/Test1.c |2 +- xts5/Xlib12/XDisplayName/XDisplayName.m|2 +- xts5/Xlib14/XUnsetICFocus.m|2 +- xts5/Xl

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration and packaging (reposted to .cc)

On 01/04/2012 10:26 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 18:12, Matt Dew wrote: This is the same 'make check' that the tinderbox uses right? Thread: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2012-January/028225.html Forgive me if I'm being dumb here. My thought, on pretty much no sleep

[PATCH 2/2] Revert "dix: don't return BadMatch from GetProperty (#23562)"

This reverts commit f04fe06ae244b851b38be824b1a80f2f8a030591. dixLookupWindow no longer returns BadMatch. No other caller was checking for it, so this problem is now fixed in the utility function. Signed-off-by: Christopher James Halse Rogers --- dix/property.c |2 +- 1 files changed, 1 in

[PATCH 1/2] dix: Return BadWindow rather than BadMatch from dixLookupWindow

dixLookupWindow uses dixLookupDrawable internally, which returns BadMatch when the XID matches a non-Window drawable. Users of dixLookupWindow don't care about this, just that it's not a valid Window. This is a generalised version of the fix for X.Org Bug 23562, where GetProperty was incorrectly

Re: [PATCH] xfree86: split warning about missing identifier or input driver

Peter Hutterer (05/01/2012): > Check for identifier first and bail if it's missing (also remove the current > identifier check after we've already bailed due to missing identifiers) > > If a driver is missing, warn but also say that we may have added this device > already. I see too many bugrepor

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration - Part 2

On 12-01-04 06:33 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote: > On 01/04/2012 02:14 PM, Gaetan Nadon wrote: >> On 12-01-04 02:38 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote: >>> I should have added... The shader debugger isn't complete. This is a >>> prototype/proof of concept. Somehow that got dropped in my earlier >>> mail. >>> >>> On 0

Re: [PATCH] Change autogen.sh scripts to respect NOCONFIGURE

On 12-01-04 05:53 PM, Colin Walters wrote: > Background: I'm trying hard to bring continuous integration and testing > to the FOSS stack between linux and gnome-shell. That means building > from git, not manual integration via tarballs. The current xorg > autogen.sh scripts just need one minor tw

[PATCH] xfree86: split warning about missing identifier or input driver

Check for identifier first and bail if it's missing (also remove the current identifier check after we've already bailed due to missing identifiers) If a driver is missing, warn but also say that we may have added this device already. I see too many bugreports with incorrectly shortened log files.

Re: [PATCH synaptics] Constify priv->device

On 01/04/2012 02:40 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote: > On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 08:41:25PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: >>> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 19:01:31 + >>> From: Daniel Stone >>> >>> Hi, >>> If Daniel Kurtz's analysis of the problem is right, and I believe it is, then this diff is just as

[PATCH] Don't end touchpoint if owning client hasn't accepted/rejected

A touchpoint is ended when no further processing will take place for it. This includes the situation where there is only one grabbing client, and the client receives a touch end before it has accepted/rejected the touchpoint. This change ensures that a delivered touch end event is converted into a

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration - Part 2

On 01/04/2012 02:14 PM, Gaetan Nadon wrote: On 12-01-04 02:38 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote: I should have added... The shader debugger isn't complete. This is a prototype/proof of concept. Somehow that got dropped in my earlier mail. On 01/04/2012 11:34 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote: On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 a

Re: [PATCH 11/31] mi: _X_UNEXPORT

On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 11:11:55PM +, Daniel Stone wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 08:40:41AM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 11:31:17AM +, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > Remove unnecessary _X_EXPORT tags from mi headers. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Ston

Re: [PATCH] Change autogen.sh scripts to respect NOCONFIGURE

On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 00:12 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Colin Walters (04/01/2012): > > Background: I'm trying hard to bring continuous integration and testing > > to the FOSS stack between linux and gnome-shell. That means building > > from git, not manual integration via tarballs. The curr

Re: [PATCH 22/31] DIX: _X_UNEXPORT

Hi, On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 11:32:31AM -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > On 12/02/11 03:31, Daniel Stone wrote: > >--- a/dix/dispatch.c > >+++ b/dix/dispatch.c > >@@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ static int nextFreeClientID; /* always MIN free client > >ID */ > > > > static int nClients; /* number of au

Re: [PATCH 21/31] XFree86: _X_UNEXPORT

On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 08:50:03AM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 11:31:27AM +, Daniel Stone wrote: > > Unexport all the remaining _X_EXPORTed XFree86 symbols not used by any > > drivers. > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Stone > > Needed externally: > xf86OptionName(XF86

Re: [PATCH] Change autogen.sh scripts to respect NOCONFIGURE

Colin Walters (04/01/2012): > Background: I'm trying hard to bring continuous integration and testing > to the FOSS stack between linux and gnome-shell. That means building > from git, not manual integration via tarballs. The current xorg > autogen.sh scripts just need one minor tweak to match t

Re: [PATCH 11/31] mi: _X_UNEXPORT

Hi, On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 08:40:41AM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 11:31:17AM +, Daniel Stone wrote: > > Remove unnecessary _X_EXPORT tags from mi headers. > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Stone > > some of these are still used by input drivers, most likely in error.

Re: [PATCH 08/31] os: _X_UNEXPORT

On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 12:33:46PM -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > On 12/02/11 03:31, Daniel Stone wrote: > >diff --git a/include/dixstruct.h b/include/dixstruct.h > >index 0a85f40..1a4aece 100644 > >--- a/include/dixstruct.h > >+++ b/include/dixstruct.h > >@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ SOFTWARE. > > *

[PATCH] Change autogen.sh scripts to respect NOCONFIGURE

Background: I'm trying hard to bring continuous integration and testing to the FOSS stack between linux and gnome-shell. That means building from git, not manual integration via tarballs. The current xorg autogen.sh scripts just need one minor tweak to match the ones we use in GNOME. I've been s

Re: [PATCH synaptics] Constify priv->device

On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 08:41:25PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 19:01:31 + > > From: Daniel Stone > > > > Hi, > > > > > If Daniel Kurtz's analysis of the problem is right, and I believe it > > > is, then this diff is just as wrong as the previous diff from Peter. > >

Re: [PATCH inputproto] specs: Clarify rejection for touch events on current owner

On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 06:07:50PM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote: > Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone Cheers, Daniel ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration - Part 2

On 12-01-04 02:38 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote: > I should have added... The shader debugger isn't complete. This is a > prototype/proof of concept. Somehow that got dropped in my earlier mail. > > On 01/04/2012 11:34 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:31:48PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrot

Re: [driver/xf86-input-vmmouse] build problem from git sources

Hi Cyril, On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.freedesktop.xorg.devel/26565 :-D Thank you. Sorry for not searching first. ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org

Re: [driver/xf86-input-vmmouse] build problem from git sources

Hi Trevor, Trevor Woerner (04/01/2012): > I'm trying to build the project sources on a fresh machine using the > modular build.sh procedure. Currently I'm experiencing a build failure > in driver/xf86-input-vmmouse and can't figure out how to fix it. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.freedeskto

[driver/xf86-input-vmmouse] build problem from git sources

Hi everyone, I'm trying to build the project sources on a fresh machine using the modular build.sh procedure. Currently I'm experiencing a build failure in driver/xf86-input-vmmouse and can't figure out how to fix it. The build is having problems compiling "driver/xf86-input-vmmouse/src/vmmouse.c

Re: [PATCH synaptics] Constify priv->device

> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 19:01:31 + > From: Daniel Stone > > Hi, > > > If Daniel Kurtz's analysis of the problem is right, and I believe it > > is, then this diff is just as wrong as the previous diff from Peter. > > It also means that the real culprit is Peter's change to constify > > XIChang

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration - Part 2

I should have added... The shader debugger isn't complete. This is a prototype/proof of concept. Somehow that got dropped in my earlier mail. On 01/04/2012 11:34 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote: On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:31:48PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 15:17, Gaetan Nadon w

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration - Part 2

On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:31:48PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 15:17, Gaetan Nadon wrote: > > On 12-01-03 09:42 PM, Eric Anholt wrote: > >> On Mon, 02 Jan 2012 18:23:15 -0500, Gaetan Nadon > >> wrote: > >>> This series applies some xorg project policies and code reuse fr

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 20/20] tests/glx: Add unit tests for GLX_ARB_create_context GLX protocol

On 01/04/2012 11:05 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote: On Mit, 2012-01-04 at 10:56 -0800, Ian Romanick wrote: On 01/04/2012 10:55 AM, Daniel Stone wrote: Hi, On 4 January 2012 18:45, Ian Romanick wrote: Okay, I looked back at your build output, and I think I see the problem: * econf: updating Mes

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 20/20] tests/glx: Add unit tests for GLX_ARB_create_context GLX protocol

On Mit, 2012-01-04 at 10:56 -0800, Ian Romanick wrote: > On 01/04/2012 10:55 AM, Daniel Stone wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 4 January 2012 18:45, Ian Romanick wrote: > >> Okay, I looked back at your build output, and I think I see the problem: > >> > >> * econf: updating Mesa-/bin/config.sub wi

Re: [PATCH synaptics] Constify priv->device

Hi, On 4 January 2012 18:55, Mark Kettenis wrote: >> X-Original-To: xorg-devel@lists.x.org >> From: Daniel Stone >> Date: Wed,  4 Jan 2012 17:02:30 + >> >> Fixes a compiler warning due to discarding the const qualifier as it >> comes back from the option code. > > If Daniel Kurtz's analysis

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 20/20] tests/glx: Add unit tests for GLX_ARB_create_context GLX protocol

On 01/04/2012 10:55 AM, Daniel Stone wrote: Hi, On 4 January 2012 18:45, Ian Romanick wrote: Okay, I looked back at your build output, and I think I see the problem: * econf: updating Mesa-/bin/config.sub with /usr/share/gnuconfig/config.sub * econf: updating Mesa-/bin/config.gues

Re: [PATCH synaptics] Constify priv->device

> X-Original-To: xorg-devel@lists.x.org > From: Daniel Stone > Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 17:02:30 + > > Fixes a compiler warning due to discarding the const qualifier as it > comes back from the option code. If Daniel Kurtz's analysis of the problem is right, and I believe it is, then this diff

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 20/20] tests/glx: Add unit tests for GLX_ARB_create_context GLX protocol

Hi, On 4 January 2012 18:45, Ian Romanick wrote: > Okay, I looked back at your build output, and I think I see the problem: > >  * econf: updating Mesa-/bin/config.sub with > /usr/share/gnuconfig/config.sub >  * econf: updating Mesa-/bin/config.guess with > /usr/share/gnuconfig/config.gue

Re: [PATCH 11/31] mi: _X_UNEXPORT

Hi, On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 08:37:47AM +0100, Adam Tkac wrote: > On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 08:40:41AM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote: > > I also suspect that VNC may use some of these. > > Hello Peter, Daniel, > > thanks for CCing me. > > In VNC we use following: > - mieqProcessInputEvents You can

Re: [PATCH v2 31/42] Loader: Remove extension initialisation sorting

Hi, On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 10:00:06AM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 11:27:39AM +, Daniel Stone wrote: > > diff --git a/COPYING b/COPYING > > index cd9e80a..7aa0df0 100644 > > --- a/COPYING > > +++ b/COPYING > > @@ -1788,7 +1788,7 @@ TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 20/20] tests/glx: Add unit tests for GLX_ARB_create_context GLX protocol

On 01/04/2012 12:54 AM, Mike Lothian wrote: On 4 January 2012 03:50, Ian Romanick wrote: On 01/03/2012 06:06 PM, Mike Lothian wrote: On 3 January 2012 20:27, Ian Romanickwrote: On 01/03/2012 11:13 AM, Mike Lothian wrote: Hi Ever since these tests went in I get failures during config

Re: [PATCH 25/42] Move DRI1 from external module to built-in

Hi, On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 09:51:38AM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote: > whitespace, plus I don't actually see the change here anyway. erroneous > hunk? Yeah, just detritus from removing and re-adding it later. Removed, thanks. Cheers, Daniel ___ xorg-de

Re: [PATCH 20/42] Move DGA from extmod to built-in

Hi, On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 07:17:24PM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > 2011/12/2 Daniel Stone : > > @@ -90,6 +104,9 @@ load_extension_config(void) > >         } > >  #endif > >     } > > + > > +    for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(extensionModules); i++) > > +       LoadExtension(&extensionModules[i], TRUE

Re: [PATCH v2 08/42] Move extension initialisation prototypes into extinit.h

Hi, On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 09:44:23AM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 11:27:16AM +, Daniel Stone wrote: > > Create extinit.h (and xf86Extensions.h, for Xorg-specific extensions) to > > hold all our extension initialisation prototypes, rather than > > duplicating them ev

Re: [PATCH synaptics] Constify priv->device

Hi, For the series: Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone Cheers, Daniel On 3 January 2012 00:44, Peter Hutterer wrote: > synaptics.c: In function 'SynapticsPreInit': > synaptics.c:731:18: warning: assignment discards 'const' qualifier from > pointer target type [enabled by default] > > Signed-off-by: Pete

Re: [PATCH synaptics] Constify priv->device

Hi, On 4 January 2012 17:30, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Daniel Stone (04/01/2012): >> Fixes a compiler warning due to discarding the const qualifier as it >> comes back from the option code. >> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Stone > > Reminds me of <1325553573-13476-1-git-send-email-peter.hutte...@who-

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration and packaging (reposted to .cc)

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 16:39, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > On 01/04/12 06:38, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> One thing I'm wondering is whether we could easily ship these tests in >> some form, so that users could run them from the distro package >> instead of grabbing the sources. > > Should distros just b

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration and packaging (reposted to .cc)

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 18:12, Matt Dew wrote: > This is the same 'make check' that the tinderbox uses right? > Thread: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2012-January/028225.html > > Forgive me if I'm being dumb here. My thought, on pretty much no sleep last > night, is should tinderbox be usi

Re: [PATCH synaptics] Constify priv->device

Daniel Stone (04/01/2012): > Fixes a compiler warning due to discarding the const qualifier as it > comes back from the option code. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Stone Reminds me of <1325553573-13476-1-git-send-email-peter.hutte...@who-t.net>: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.freedesktop.xorg

Re: [PATCH 09/11] glx: Use one function to add a context to all global tables

On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 17:00:32 -0800 Ian Romanick wrote: > On 01/03/2012 04:28 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: > > On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 15:18:27 -0800 > > "Ian Romanick" wrote: > > > >> From: Ian Romanick > >> > >> Instead of having separate __glXAddContextToList and AddResource > >> functions, just have o

Re: [PATCH 05/11] glx: Optionally call DRI2 createContextAttribs from __glXDRIscreenCreateContext

On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 16:45:49 -0800 Ian Romanick wrote: > > Maybe stuff this into a separate function that's a no-op in the< 3 > > case? That would clean things up a little and save an #ifdef in the > > middle of a function (always a nice thing). > > > > Or just require updated DRI2 bits to build

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration and packaging (reposted to .cc)

On 01/04/2012 08:39 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: On 01/04/12 06:38, Daniel Vetter wrote: Originally we've abused make check, but that turned out to be a bad idea because make distcheck automatically runs that. And the tests check the kernel and not intel-gpu-tools itself, so that didn't make much

[PATCH synaptics] Constify priv->device

Fixes a compiler warning due to discarding the const qualifier as it comes back from the option code. Signed-off-by: Daniel Stone --- src/properties.c |2 +- src/synapticsstr.h |2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/properties.c b/src/properties.c ind

Re: [PATCH] vgahw: Fix DACDelay() macro to use the driver's vtable

> From: Adam Jackson > Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 11:39:33 -0500 > > We don't want to unconditionally use I/O routines here, since if the > driver is using mmap'd VGA ports then the I/O handle won't be set up. Hmm, well, reading from mmap'd VGA ports is unlikely to result in the same timing as readi

[PATCH] vgahw: Fix DACDelay() macro to use the driver's vtable

We don't want to unconditionally use I/O routines here, since if the driver is using mmap'd VGA ports then the I/O handle won't be set up. Tested-by: Jeff Chua Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson --- hw/xfree86/vgahw/vgaHW.h |8 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration and packaging (reposted to .cc)

On 01/04/12 06:38, Daniel Vetter wrote: Originally we've abused make check, but that turned out to be a bad idea because make distcheck automatically runs that. And the tests check the kernel and not intel-gpu-tools itself, so that didn't make much sense. Hence we added make test with a quick hac

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration and packaging (reposted to .cc)

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 15:33, Gaetan Nadon wrote: > On 12-01-04 04:52 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> While I have the attention of someone versed in buildsystem-fu: >> intel-gpu-tools also contains a set of tests for the i915 kernel module >> (and the libdrm interface for it). Currently we run them w

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration - Part 2

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 15:17, Gaetan Nadon wrote: > On 12-01-03 09:42 PM, Eric Anholt wrote: >> On Mon, 02 Jan 2012 18:23:15 -0500, Gaetan Nadon >> wrote: >>> This series applies some xorg project policies and code reuse from >>> util-macros. >>> In some cases it reverts "upgrades" that were "t

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration and packaging (reposted to .cc)

On 12-01-04 04:52 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > While I have the attention of someone versed in buildsystem-fu: > intel-gpu-tools also contains a set of tests for the i915 kernel module > (and the libdrm interface for it). Currently we run them with > > $ make test > > by abusing the automake test rig

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration - Part 2

On 12-01-03 09:42 PM, Eric Anholt wrote: > On Mon, 02 Jan 2012 18:23:15 -0500, Gaetan Nadon wrote: >> This series applies some xorg project policies and code reuse from >> util-macros. >> In some cases it reverts "upgrades" that were "too new" for the overall xorg. >> There were no bug fixes, thi

Expected behaviour for xrandr --fb

Hi All, For the "--fb" option of xrandr, there is some description below in the man page. Besides the screen size change, I'm wondering if the display mode should also be updated to the closest mode of "widthxheight" if we just run "xrandr --fb widthxheight". Can anybody here give some ideas? Tha

Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration and packaging (reposted to .cc)

On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 09:12:16PM -0500, Gaetan Nadon wrote: > This module is hosted as an X.Org app and is published as such. > This patch adds some missing packaging files and sets some basic > infrastructure > common to all xorg modules which saves maintenance in the long run. > > http://www.

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 20/20] tests/glx: Add unit tests for GLX_ARB_create_context GLX protocol

On 4 January 2012 03:50, Ian Romanick wrote: > On 01/03/2012 06:06 PM, Mike Lothian wrote: >> >> On 3 January 2012 20:27, Ian Romanick  wrote: >>> >>> On 01/03/2012 11:13 AM, Mike Lothian wrote: Hi Ever since these tests went in I get failures during configure: >