On Thu 09 Jul 2015, Emil Velikov wrote: > On 9 July 2015 at 21:21, Chad Versace <chad.vers...@intel.com> wrote: > > On Thu 09 Jul 2015, Emil Velikov wrote: > >> On 9 July 2015 at 09:39, Chad Versace <chad.vers...@intel.com> wrote: > >> > EGL_EXT_image_dma_buf_import now supports those formats. > >> > > >> Do I have an old version of it (v6) or I simply cannot see those listed ? > > > > I should have been more clear when I said "EGL_EXT_image_dma_buf_import > > now supports those formats". I meant "now supports those formats as of > > the previous patch". > > > > The EGL_EXT_image_dma_buf_import spec itself lists no DRM formats. v6 of > > the spec refers to drm_fourcc.h for formats by saying this: > > > > * EGL_LINUX_DRM_FOURCC_EXT: The pixel format of the buffer, as > > specified by drm_fourcc.h and used as the pixel_format parameter of > > the drm_mode_fb_cmd2 ioctl. > I was blindly searching for DRI_IMAGE_FOURCC, silly me. Thank you for > kindly pointing me in the correct direction. > > Afaics Gwenole sent out an identical set of patches ~an year ago, and > they seems to have fallen through the cracks.
I discussed Gwenole's patches with the XBMC/Kodi devs (CC'd here), and concluded that the current approach (supporting more formats in EGL_EXT_image_dma_buf_import) will be less problematic. To be fair, though, Gwenole didn't get a chance to respond in that discussion because (I believe) he was on vacation. Gwenole, do we need to talk about the two different approaches we took to solve the problem? _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
