[RFC] drm: expose connector status values in uapi

[Simon Ser]

On Friday, June 26, 2020 11:15 AM, Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen at gmail.com> wrote:

> I have no opinion really if adding yet another set of the same
> definitions is good or not. We do need the UAPI doc, but that does not
> necessarily mean we also need definition code in UAPI headers.
>
> I give this one a shrug.

But then uapi docs don't document uapi, instead document internal
kernel enums? And also user-space not using libdrm needs to have these
hardcoded somewhere.

The libdrm re-definitions are annoying. Maybe a better way forward
would be to have a "status" prop, which could then also be used for
the planned fine-grained uapi events.