[PATCH] drm: Fix drm.h uapi header for Windows

[James Park]

I'm not completely sure what you're saying, but doesn't drm_base_types.h
(now drm_basic_types.h) make things robust to header order? The patch is in
another email. You can also see it here:
https://github.com/jpark37/linux/commit/0cc8ae750bfd9eab7e31c7de6aa84f24682f4f18

Thanks,
James

On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 12:51 AM Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 11:07:41 -0800
> James Park <james.park at lagfreegames.com> wrote:
>
> > I could adjust the block to look like this:
> >
> > #ifdef DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE
> > #if defined(__linux__)
> > #include <linux/types.h>
> > #else
> > #include <stdint.h>
> > typedef uint32_t __u32;
> > typedef uint64_t __u64;
> > #endif
> > #else
> > #include "drm.h"
> > #endif
> >
> > Alternatively, I could create a new common header to be included from
> both
> > drm.h and drm_fourcc.h, drm_base_types.h or something like that:
> >
> > #ifdef DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE
> > #include "drm_base_types.h"
> > #else
> > #include "drm.h"
> > #endif
>
> Hi,
>
> my point is, any solution relying on DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE will fail
> sometimes, because there is no reason why userspace would *not* #define
> DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE. Hence, #ifdef DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE is
> completely moot, you have to make the headers work in any include
> order when DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE is defined anyway.
>
>
> Thanks.
> pq
>
> > On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 7:58 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 9:12 AM Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 21:45:14 +0100
> > > > Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 7:55 PM James Park <
> james.park at lagfreegames.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The trailing underscore for  DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE_ isn't
> > > > > > intentional, right? Should I put all the integer types, or just
> the
> > > > > > ones that are used in that file?
> > > > >
> > > > > Yeah that trailing _ just slipped in. And I'd just do the types
> > > > > already used. I don't think anything else than __u32 (for drm
> fourcc)
> > > > > and __u64 (for drm modifier) is needed.
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > can that create conflicts if userspace first includes drm_fourcc.h
> and
> > > > then drm.h?
> > > >
> > > > I would find it natural to userspace have generic headers including
> > > > drm_fourcc.h and then DRM-specific C-files including drm.h as well
> > > > (through libdrm headers). I think Weston might already do this.
> > > >
> > > > The generic userspace (weston) header would obviously #define
> > > > DRM_FOURCC_STANDALONE, because it is used by non-DRM C-files as
> well.
> > >
> > > Hm yes that would break. I guess we could just include the linux types
> > > header for this. And I guess on windows you'd need to have that from
> > > somewhere. Or we just require that users of the standalone header pull
> > > the right header or defines in first?
> > > -Daniel
> > > --
> > > Daniel Vetter
> > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> > > http://blog.ffwll.ch
> > >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20201207/5bd0f7fd/attachment-0001.htm>