On Thursday, 2017-11-23 16:32:06 +0000, Emil Velikov wrote: > On 23 November 2017 at 16:04, Eric Engestrom <eric.engest...@imgtec.com> > wrote: > > On Thursday, 2017-11-23 13:32:47 +0000, Emil Velikov wrote: > >> Hi Eric, > >> > >> On 22 November 2017 at 17:59, Eric Engestrom <eric.engest...@imgtec.com> > >> wrote: > >> > A recent thread [1] made me check our local specs to see which ones were > >> > upstream. This series removes the ones that are identical upstream > >> > (modulo "TBD" extension numbers in some cases). > >> > > >> > There are a few more specs left that are upstream, but have typo fixes > >> > that I'm going to submit to Khronos, and I'll remove the local copies > >> > once the fixes have been upstreamed: > >> The idea sounds great, just some minor comments - mostly about > >> potential deprecation. > >> > >> > - EGL_MESA_drm_image > >> The extension, lacks information about error handling (et al) and is > >> no longer used. > >> There is even an extra bitmask in eglmesaext.h that's quite meh thing to > >> do. > >> Perhaps we should consider officially deprecating it as hinted earlier [1] > >> > >> [1] https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2017-June/161575.html > > > > What does "deprecate" mean exactly, in this context? Move to > > docs/specs/OLD/? > > Should anything be done in the upstream specs to flag them as deprecated? > > > There is the "obsolete" status [1] that we can use. Overall I'm thinking > about: > - Annotate the extension as Obsolete in the spec file. > - Add printf "Warning using a deprecated extension %s. Will be > removed with Mesa version AA" > - Clearly document ^^ as part of the release. > - Remove the relevant code as expected.
Thanks for the info :) However, I don't feel comfortable doing this; someone else who knows the extensions and their implementations & users should do this. > > [1] > https://github.com/KhronosGroup/OpenGL-Registry/blob/master/docs/template.txt#L203 > > > >> > >> > - GLX_MESA_release_buffers > >> Extension is implemented only for Xlib based libGL. The DRI codepath > >> has a TODO for at least 7 years. > >> Worth checking if anyone uses it and not just deprecate the extension? > > > > I don't know much about GLX, so I'll let someone else do this. > > > Ack. in the interim, can you grep your systems for any existing users? I'm not sure what you mean? Grepping `strings(1)` of installed apps to find one checking for these extensions? > Looking from the opposite end - quick search shows that only Mesa has > implemented the said extensions. I checked the powervr codebase as well, no MESA_* extension is implemented at all. > > If there's no users and no implementation*, despite the extensions > being available for years ... > > -Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
