On 28 August 2017 at 03:43, Leo Liu <leo....@amd.com> wrote: > > > On 08/27/2017 01:49 PM, Emil Velikov wrote: >> >> Hi Leo, >> >> On 24 August 2017 at 16:11, Leo Liu <leo....@amd.com> wrote: >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Leo Liu <leo....@amd.com> >>> --- >>> src/gallium/auxiliary/vl/vl_compositor.c | 87 >>> +++++++++++++++++++++----------- >>> src/gallium/auxiliary/vl/vl_compositor.h | 21 ++++---- >>> src/gallium/state_trackers/omx/vid_dec.c | 32 +----------- >>> 3 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 72 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/src/gallium/auxiliary/vl/vl_compositor.c >>> b/src/gallium/auxiliary/vl/vl_compositor.c >>> index a79bf11264..794c8b5b17 100644 >>> --- a/src/gallium/auxiliary/vl/vl_compositor.c >>> +++ b/src/gallium/auxiliary/vl/vl_compositor.c >>> @@ -885,6 +885,32 @@ draw_layers(struct vl_compositor *c, struct >>> vl_compositor_state *s, struct u_rec >>> } >>> } >>> >>> +static void >>> +set_yuv_layer(struct vl_compositor_state *s, struct vl_compositor *c, >>> unsigned layer, >> >> Why did you bother moving and renaming vl_compositor_set_yuv_layer? > > Because the only caller now is moved from OMX to VL, the function is good > enough to be a static, and that is name scheme for static function in vl > layer. > I think you said is perfectly - "good enough to be". Aka it's not required ;-)
>> >> You want to either keep it separate patch > > No. Separating the patch into vl and st/omx may cause build failing because > of the renaming > Nope it won't: a) vl_compositor_yuv_deint: move the omx > vl, still using vl_compositor_set_yuv_layer b) vl_compositor_set_yuv_layer: drop the prefix and make it static -Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
