The typedefs might also conflict on Linux if DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE is enabled with whatever LInux declared __u32/__u64 as, but I think the implication is that once DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE has been declared, that's kind of a promise not to include drm.h.
I'm fine with this, but I'm not married to it if someone has a problem where they want to define DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE, but also can't avoid including drm.h for some reason. On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 12:53 AM Simon Ser <cont...@emersion.fr> wrote: > On Friday, December 4, 2020 5:53 AM, James Park <jpar...@lagfreegames.com> > wrote: > > > +#ifdef DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE > > +#include <stdint.h> > > > > +typedef uint32_t __u32; > > +typedef uint64_t __u64; > > +#else > > #include "drm.h" > > +#endif > > C11 allows duplicate typedefs, but older versions of the standard > don't AFAIK. If this is a concern, a solution would be to guard the > typedefs. >
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
