[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 2/2] i965: Support importing R8 and GR88 dma_bufs

Chad Versace chad.versace at intel.com
Thu Jul 9 16:14:44 PDT 2015

On Thu 09 Jul 2015, Emil Velikov wrote:
> On 9 July 2015 at 21:21, Chad Versace <chad.versace at intel.com> wrote:
> > On Thu 09 Jul 2015, Emil Velikov wrote:
> >> On 9 July 2015 at 09:39, Chad Versace <chad.versace at intel.com> wrote:
> >> > EGL_EXT_image_dma_buf_import now supports those formats.
> >> >
> >> Do I have an old version of it (v6) or I simply cannot see those listed ?
> >
> > I should have been more clear when I said "EGL_EXT_image_dma_buf_import
> > now supports those formats". I meant "now supports those formats as of
> > the previous patch".
> >
> > The EGL_EXT_image_dma_buf_import spec itself lists no DRM formats. v6 of
> > the spec refers to drm_fourcc.h for formats by saying this:
> >
> >     * EGL_LINUX_DRM_FOURCC_EXT: The pixel format of the buffer, as
> >       specified by drm_fourcc.h and used as the pixel_format parameter of
> >       the drm_mode_fb_cmd2 ioctl.
> I was blindly searching for DRI_IMAGE_FOURCC, silly me. Thank you for
> kindly pointing me in the correct direction.
> Afaics Gwenole sent out an identical set of patches ~an year ago, and
> they seems to have fallen through the cracks.

I discussed Gwenole's patches with the XBMC/Kodi devs (CC'd here), and
concluded that the current approach (supporting more formats in
EGL_EXT_image_dma_buf_import) will be less problematic. To be fair,
though, Gwenole didn't get a chance to respond in that discussion
because (I believe) he was on vacation.

Gwenole, do we need to talk about the two different approaches we took
to solve the problem?

More information about the mesa-dev mailing list