[Mesa-dev] [PATCH] configure.ac: describe what all the LIBDRM_*REQUIRED macros mean

[Chad Versace]

On Thu 02 Feb 2017, Emil Velikov wrote:
> From: Emil Velikov <emil.velikov at collabora.com>
> 
> They are versions of the respective libdrm package. They are _not_ the
> version of libdrm[.so] required for driver X.
> 
> Doing the latter will lead to combinatoric explosion and in all fairness
> things will likely be broken most of the time.
> 
> To make things even more confusing the kernel UAPI is provided by libdrm
> itself.
> 
> Cc: Vinson Lee <vlee at freedesktop.org>
> Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth at whitecape.org>
> Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <emil.velikov at collabora.com>
> ---
> Ken, you/Chad have things spot on. Yet semes like other people struggle
> deeply with these.

Actually, I agree with airlied and imirkin. I made a mistake when
I bumped LIBDRM_REQUIRED.

Anyway, I don't understand what the commit message nor the configure.ac
comment is trying to say. The wording is too muddy and imprecise to make
much sense.

> ---
>  configure.ac | 7 +++++++
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index 92339b4a3f..e8e154b412 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -67,6 +67,13 @@ OPENCL_VERSION=1
>  AC_SUBST([OPENCL_VERSION])
>  
>  dnl Versions for external dependencies
> +dnl
> +dnl The LIBDRM instances reference either the generic libdrm or the specific
> +dnl specific libdrm-$hw.
> +dnl They are _not_ "the min. libdrm required for dri/gallium/other driver $foo."
> +dnl
> +dnl Note that the "basic" ABI for $hw -> $hw_drm.h is provided by libdrm itself.
> +dnl
>  LIBDRM_REQUIRED=2.4.75
>  LIBDRM_RADEON_REQUIRED=2.4.56
>  LIBDRM_AMDGPU_REQUIRED=2.4.63
> -- 
> 2.11.0
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev