Hi Jonathan,
On 1 December 2016 at 04:18, Jonathan Gray <j...@jsg.id.au> wrote:
> --- a/xf86drm.c
> +++ b/xf86drm.c
> @@ -3248,6 +3248,67 @@ drm_device_validate_flags(uint32_t flags)
> */
> int drmGetDevice2(int fd, uint32_t flags, drmDevicePtr *device)
> {
> +#ifdef __OpenBSD__
> + /*
> + * DRI device nodes on OpenBSD are not in their own directory, they
> reside
> + * in /dev along with a large number of statically generated /dev nodes.
> + * Avoid stat'ing all of /dev needlessly by implementing this custom
> path.
> + */
I was in the area, fixing the odd bug and doing some cleanups and a
question came to mind:
Is there some obstacle of placing the drm nodes under /dev/dri/? It
would involve a check/update through the OpenBSD tree, yet no obvious
downsides comes to mind.
I think it would make things more distinct and obvious. IIRC the
OpenBSD xserver does some checking which /dev node opened, the
suggestion should help there.
What do you think?
Emil
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
