"Pohjolainen, Topi" <[email protected]> writes: > On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 10:54:12AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 04:57:49PM -0700, Eric Anholt wrote: >> > > +#define fourcc_code(a,b,c,d) ((uint32_t)(a) | ((uint32_t)(b) << 8) | \ >> > > + ((uint32_t)(c) << 16) | ((uint32_t)(d) >> > > << 24)) >> > > +#define DRM_FORMAT_ARGB8888 fourcc_code('A', 'R', '2', '4') >> > >> > This is in many subtests, and should pretty clearly be in a header. >> >> That thing is in the drm_fourcc.h kernel userspace header. Do we just need >> a check to make sure the linux-headers are recent enough? > > I tried to keep the tests platform independent, and this was to avoid any need > for libdrm inclusions there. (One checks for particular driver and platform > in the framework and uses their settings for inclusions and libraries). > > I could add a common header if you like. But then again there are a quite a > bit > of other things in all the tests that one could start refactoring, and these > one-liners weren't on top of my list.
I think only building these tests on HAVE_LIBDRM and using libdrm headers is totally appropriate -- dma_bufs are a DRM feature, and any implementation of them will have those drm headers.
pgpIUETs2kfQT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
