On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 18:10:28 +0000 Simon Ser <cont...@emersion.fr> wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 28th, 2022 at 12:06, Pekka Paalanen > <ppaala...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > +/** > > > + * DRM_MODE_PAGE_FLIP_FLAGS > > > + * > > > + * Bitmask of flags suitable for &drm_mode_crtc_page_flip_target.flags. > > > > Should this mention also drm_mode_crtc_page_flip.flags? > > > > UAPI header defines both structs. > > drm_mode_crtc_page_flip is "v1", drm_mode_crtc_page_flip_target is "v2". The > latter just replaces a reserved field with a new one. So I figured "v1" is > mostly kept around for backwards compat and everybody should use "v2" for > simplicity's sake. Makes sense after one finds the doc that says this is a v2 of that. Backward compat makes sense, because someone might have been setting .reserved=0 explicitly. FWIW, libdrm does not use _target for drmModePageFlip(). Thanks, pq
pgpPBzv9cLVPz.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
