Hello Emil, On 2015-04-21 20:14, Emil Velikov wrote: > Hi Tobias, > > On 30/03/15 13:04, Tobias Jakobi wrote: >> Hello, >> >> On 2015-03-30 02:02, Rob Clark wrote: >>> so, iirc, vmwgfx also has some custom events.. not really sure if >>> they have their own hand-rolled drmHandleEvent() or if they have >>> another way of catching those. >>> >>> Maybe we need some more flexible way to register handlers for driver >>> custom events? But everyone adding their own thing to >>> drmHandleEvent() doesn't really seem so nice.. that said, I'm not >>> sure how much to care. If it is just exynos and vmwgfx, then telling >>> them to use there own version of of drmHandleEvent() might be ok. >>> But >>> if driver custom events somehow become more popular, maybe we want a >>> better solution.. >> >> would something like this work for you guys: >> https://www.math.uni-bielefeld.de/~tjakobi/archive/0001-custom-events.patch >> >> (this is not compile tested or anything, just a draft) >> >> Basically this introduces drmHandleEvent2, which is drmHandleEvent >> with >> two additional arguments. The first one being a function pointer >> through >> which the 'remaining' events (which are not handled by the common >> code) >> are handled, and some (opaque) pointer to data that the handler might >> need. >> >> In the vendor specific code I then introcuded exynos_handle_event >> which >> calls dramHandleEvent2 with a properly setup handler. vmwgfx could do >> the same here I guess. >> > I'm assuming that one of the concerns here is about adding API for a > single (and not so common) user to the core library. > > From a quick look at the mesa and xf86-video-vmware I cannot see the > vmwgfx driver using events. It has some definitions in vmwgfx_drm.h but > that's about it. > > That aside - the drmHandleEvent2 approach looks like a massive > improvement over the original patch. Personally I do not see any > problems with it and think that it's a good way forward. > > Perhaps you can come over to #dri-devel and ping the devs to get some > more feedback. As the topic is not a priority for most of them your > suggestions has mostly gone unnoticed. I'm going to flesh out the non-exynos patches some more before sending them to the ML for discussion.
With best wishes, Tobias
