[PATCH 06/13] tests/exynos: add fimg2d event test

[Tobias Jakobi]

Hello Emil,


Emil Velikov wrote:
> On 30 October 2015 at 11:16, Tobias Jakobi
> <tjakobi at math.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:
>> Hello Hyungwon,
>>
>> first of all thanks for reviewing the series!
>>
>>
>>
>> Hyungwon Hwang wrote:
>>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 17:54:55 +0200
>>> Tobias Jakobi <tjakobi at math.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:
>>>
> 
>>>> +    evhandler->evctx.base.version = DRM_EVENT_CONTEXT_VERSION;
>>>> +    evhandler->evctx.version = EXYNOS_EVENT_CONTEXT_VERSION;
>>>
>>> The versions must be set not using XXX_EVENT_CONTEXT_VERSION. After the
>>> versions are bumped, the event will contains wrong version info.
>> Hmm, I don't see how this is true. Both DRM_EVENT_CONTEXT_VERSION and
>> EXYNOS_EVENT_CONTEXT_VERSION come from the public libdrm header. If the
>> version in the public header is bumped, then it's also bumped here. So I
>> don't see the issue.
>>
> The issue is that the public header defines the interface available,
> while you set the version that you implement. Currently those match,
> but if/when we expand the API (bumping the version in the header) and
> rebuild your program we will crash.
Hmm, I'm still not sure I understand this. Do you mean rebuilding the
tests out-of-tree and then running them against a newer/older libdrm
version?

Because from my understanding the tests are always build together with
libdrm anyway. Or am I misunderstanding here something?


> Before you ask - yes current libdrm users are not doing the right
> thing and should be updated one of these days.
Maybe a dumb question, but what would be the right thing to do in may case.

Define my own MY_XZY_EVENT_CONTEXT_VERSION and use these?

With best wishes,
Tobias



> -Emil
> P.S. Having some deja-vu here... I thought I mentioned this a while back.
>