On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 8:18 AM, Daniel Stone <dan...@fooishbar.org> wrote: > Hey Emil, > A few bits from me, since this is actually lfrb's code ... > > On 20 June 2017 at 15:19, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Top-level comments >> >> Build POV: >> - Having the XCB_DRI3_.*_VERSION compile guards is Ok for now. But >> let's drop those as get a xcb release. >> We dont want to be in cases where Mesa is built w/o DRI3 1.1 support >> and one spends time debugging why "nothing works". > > I don't think anything should fail ... ? If DRI3v1.1 isn't available > (either client or server), we won't be calling > ->createImageWithModifiers, so the old path will only allocate buffers > which can be described without modifiers; either linear, or where the > tiling can be determined by the importer with no explicit information. > Similarly, we fall back gracefully to the single-plane/no-modifier > DRI3 wire requests. > > I'm fine with bumping the dependencies personally, but it means that > people will have to update both xcb-proto and libxcb to be able to > build at all on, say, the version of Debian released a couple of days > ago.
Right. Nothing will fail, but it might cause headaches with people attempting to benchmark things, and not having the necessary versions of XCB. I think I'd opt for bumping the requirements, personally. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
