[PATCH] Autodetect libdrm path (v2)
emil.l.velikov at gmail.com
Tue Feb 7 11:02:17 UTC 2017
On 6 February 2017 at 22:39, StDenis, Tom <Tom.StDenis at amd.com> wrote:
> Apparently I missed the bottom of your reply (all of the clients I have outlook/gmail do top post only ...)
Both Outlook and Gmail can do inline replies and plain text. There
might be some magic required for the former though :-\
I would kindly suggest using inline/text when possible.
> as for the cmake changes. I'm for it if you want to submit a patch. I can't imagine a lot of cross compiling though since users will typically be using it on the platform they built it for.
> Ironically, I had the pkg_check originally but was told that's a faux-pas.
It's a common misconception, influenced by the sheer volume of copy/paste :-)
> Unless this is breaking for actual users though it's not really a priority to bikeshed the build system of a 30 file project that is meant to work only on developer machines who are likely building for themselves
Up-to you really. FWIW using cmake/autoconf/etc. is a huge overkill.
The original makefile was missing a few things* worth 10-20 lines of
code while being noticeably smaller, quicker and easier to read ;-)
* Dependency tracking (pkg-config + foo.pc), incremental builds - ($CC
... -MM -MP ...), tarballs.
> From: amd-gfx <amd-gfx-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> on behalf of StDenis, Tom <Tom.StDenis at amd.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 6, 2017 16:33
> To: Emil Velikov; Tom St Denis
> Cc: amd-gfx mailing list
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Autodetect libdrm path (v2)
> I have to NAK that idea since we use umr on NPI work which doesn't necessarily have libdrm support.
> Also umr can read/write registers via pci access without amdgpu loaded (handy if amdgpu fails to init properly).
Must have missed this part. Thanks for the correction.
> Though you are right that libdrm is technically a requirement and I should add that to the README.
More information about the amd-gfx