On Tuesday, 6 September 2016, Rob Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Kristian Høgsberg <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> wrote: >
> > If we have the gbm eglimage path, why do we keep the intel specific code > around? > > only plausible reason I could come up with is that gbm path depends on > a fairly recent version of gbm to have the gbm_bo_map/unmap() bits.. > if that isn't an issue, we should drop the intel path. Otherwise we > should plan on eventually dropping intel path. > > Unless things have changed over the last few hours, none of the classic dri drivers expose map/unmap image. Emil
_______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
