On Tue 07 Apr 2015, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 6:46 PM, Frank Henigman <fjhenig...@google.com> wrote:
The name "surfaceless" suits me.
Does this platform need to provide a hint to the user about buffer format?
Platform drm does this via the EGL_NATIVE_VISUAL_ID query of
eglGetConfigAttrib(), returning a gbm format value. Unless we do the
same or similar here, how does the user robustly find the right format
for allocating buffers?
GBM provides
int gbm_device_is_format_supported(struct gbm_device *gbm, uint32_t
format, uint32_t usage);
and you can use that to find a format that works with GBM_BO_USE_RENDERING.
I don't think it makes sense to use EGL_NATIVE_VISUAL_ID here, so
Kristian's suggestion sounds good to me. The EGL_NATIVE_VISUAL_ID, of
course, has the same type as the native format of
EGLNativeWindowSurface. But this platform has no EGLNativeWindowSurface,
so therefore it has no EGL_NATIVE_VISUAL_ID.
On first thought, it seems like re-purposing EGL_NATIVE_VISUAL_ID for
this platform setting it to a gbm format, might be a good idea. But
ultimately I think it's a bad idea because the platform isn't tied to
gbm in any way. Today we use gbm_bo_create() to create the dma_buf
storage, but tomorrow we might use a different API that doesn't
understand gbm formats.
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
