On Thu 15 Jun 2017, Gurchetan Singh wrote:
> Emil, would you be fine with leaving the image extension in dri2.c but still
> adding it as a drisw extension? That solution would look like:
>
> [1]https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/154807/
Observations:
- src/gallium/state_trackers/dri/dri2.c:dri2ImageExtension advertises v15
of __DRI_IMAGE.
- egl_dri2.c requires only v1 of __DRI_IMAGE. Maybe a higher version
is required in practive, but the egl_dri2.c code checks only for v1.
Questions:
1. All functions implemented in dri2.c:dri2ImageExtensions, do they
under swrast? Honest question, because I'm no expert on
gallium.
If question #1 is true, then I see no problem with your latest plan. But
maybe Emil does.
If question #1 is false, it should be straightforward to implement in
drisw.c the small subset of __DRI_IMAGE functions required for v1.
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
