[Mesa-dev] [PATCH v2 1/8] egl: add dri2_egl_surface_free_outdated_buffers_and_update_size() helper (v2)

[Emil Velikov]

On 18 October 2017 at 23:36, Gurchetan Singh
<gurchetansingh at chromium.org> wrote:
>> Then again, I'd suggest keeping that as separate series. These patches
>> started as a way to minimise the duplication we have in drivers/dri2.
>
> I'm fine with dri2_$action_$object.  We can modify the existing functions
> later, but I recommend adopting more concise conventions in this patchset,
> i.e:
>
> dri2_egl_surface_record_buffers_and_update_back_buffer -->
> dri2_set_back_buffer_surface
> dri2_egl_surface_free_outdated_buffers_and_update_size -->
> dri2_fixup_surface
> dri2_egl_surface_update_buffer_age --> dri2_update_age_surface
> dri2_egl_surface_get_image_front --> dri2_get_front_image_surface
>
Sure thing, let's use consistent names with this series.

>> goal the series is to a) remove a handful of the ifdef spaghetti and
>
> I agree, struct dri2_egl_surface can be refactored. I would advocate a
> solution where the surface (a) has everything a platform needs but nothing
> else (b) has a minimal amount of duplication.  I would like to look at the
> struct and see if it defines buffers[5], it must mean the platform
> implements get_buffers_with_format for example.  If a platform doesn't
> define color_buffers, it means EXT_buffer_age is not used for whatever
> reason.  Everything has dri_image_front -- then everything must use the
> image extension.  I think this type of self-consistency is useful, from a
> code is documentation point of view.  Here's pseudo-code of what I would
> want:
>
I agreed with the goals but I would swap the order/priority -
de-duplicate, then trim down.
By de-duplicating/refactoring one could add support for X/Y fairly
easily. Once all that is done, we can polish ;-)

I fear that otherwise there will be a lot of unnecessary churn.

Thanks
Emil