Hi Louis,
On 13/06/25 14:28, Louis Chauvet wrote:
Le 11/06/2025 à 21:55, Maíra Canal a écrit :
Hi Louis,
On 5/30/25 11:05, Louis Chauvet wrote:
The formats XRGB8888 and ARGB8888 were already supported.
Add the support for:
- XBGR8888
- RGBX8888
- BGRX8888
- ABGR8888
- RGBA8888
- BGRA8888
Signed-off-by: Louis Chauvet <louis.chau...@bootlin.com>
---
[...]
+READ_LINE_ARGB8888(RGBX8888_read_line, px, 0xFF, px[3], px[2], px[1])
+READ_LINE_ARGB8888(BGRX8888_read_line, px, 0xFF, px[1], px[2], px[3])
How did you test those two formats? I noticed that IGT (kms_plane tests)
doesn't test them.
Hi Maíra,
Thanks for your review!
I wrote this a long time ago, so I don't remember. I was probably greedy
and added all the "trivial" formats I was able to do and missed that
this format was not tested.
For this revision, I just started kms_plane to check if it was happy
after the rebase, I did not check the formats one by one.
Do you want me to remove those formats? I think it costs nothing to keep
them, especially with the new READ_LINE_ARGB8888 macro, but I will
comply if you think we should only merge tested formats.
If we don't have a use-case for those formats and we haven't tested
them, I can't see a compelling reason to keep them. Otherwise, we might
keep untested/unused code around that might stale over time.
Best Regards,
- Maíra
Thanks,
Louis Chauvet
Best Regards,
- Maíra
