UAPI Re: [PATCH 1/3] drm: Add DRM_MODE_TV_MODE_MONOCHROME

[Simon Ser]

On Wednesday, February 28th, 2024 at 17:14, Maxime Ripard <mripard at kernel.org> wrote:

> > I don't know what the rules were 8 years ago, but the current uAPI rules
> > are what they are, and a new enum entry is new uAPI.
> 
> TBF, and even if the wayland compositors support is missing, this
> property is perfectly usable as it is with upstream, open-source code,
> through either the command-line or X.org, and it's documented.
> 
> So it's fine by me from a UAPI requirement side.

That is not a valid way to pass the uAPI requirements IMHO. Yes, one
can program any KMS property via modetest or xrandr. Does that mean that
none of the new uAPI need a "real" implementation anymore? Does that mean
that the massive patch adding a color pipeline uAPI doesn't need
user-space anymore?

The only thing I'm saying is that this breaks the usual DRM requirements.
If, as a maintainer, you're fine with breaking the rules and have a good
motivation to do so, that's fine by me. Rules are meant to be broken from
time to time depending on the situation. But please don't pretend that
modetest/xrandr is valid user-space to pass the rules.