[Mesa-dev] [PATCH v3] egl/wayland: Support for KHR_partial_update

[Emil Velikov]

On 24 October 2017 at 02:10, Harish Krupo <harish.krupo.kps at intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Emil,
>
> Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On 23 October 2017 at 11:50, Harish Krupo <harish.krupo.kps at intel.com> wrote:
>>> This passes 33/37 deqp tests related to partial_update, 4 are not
>>> supported. Tests not supported:
>>> dEQP-EGL.functional.negative_partial_update.not_postable_surface
>>> dEQP-EGL.functional.negative_partial_update.not_current_surface
>>> dEQP-EGL.functional.negative_partial_update.buffer_preserved
>>> dEQP-EGL.functional.negative_partial_update.not_current_surface2
>>> Reason: No matching egl config found.
>>>
>>> v2: Remove unnecessary return statement. Keep function names
>>>     consistent.  (Emil Velikov)
>>>     Add not supported list to commit message. (Eric Engestrom)
>>>
>>> v3: Remove explicit with_damage variable. (Eric Engestrom)
>>>
>> Did you send the wrong version by any chance?
>> The summary does not reflect the actual changes.
>>
>
> Sorry, should have actually been:
> v3: Remove explicit with_damage variable and swap_buffers_common
>     function. Make SwapBuffers and SwapBuffersWithDamage(NULL,0)
>     equivalent in behavior. Fix called via comment for
>     swap_buffers_with_damage. (Eric Engestrom)
>     Rework try_buffer_damage into set_damage_region as it is being
>     called only from set_damage_region.
>
>> Why did you rework try_damage_buffer into dri2_wl_set_damage_region?
>> It seems harder to follow over the previous patches.
>>
>
> As try_damage_buffer was being used only in dri2_wl_set_damage_region
> and swap_buffers_with_damage was calling set_damage_region so I removed
> the unnecessary (extra) call to try_damage_region from set_damage_region
> and reworked try_damage_region to set_damage_region. Do we need to keep
> try_damage_region? If so, I will break them into two separate functions.
>
It wasn't suggested/mentioned by anyone so it's a bit of a surprise.
See what others say, but personally I'd keep try_damage_region
separate.
The compiler will be smart enough to inline as applicable.

Thanks
Emil