[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 2/3] egl: Wrap dri3 surface primitive around dri2 egl surface

[Emil Velikov]

On 15 September 2017 at 16:48, Marathe, Yogesh <yogesh.marathe at intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Eric Engestrom [mailto:eric.engestrom at imgtec.com]
>>Sent: Friday, September 15, 2017 7:13 PM
>>To: Marathe, Yogesh <yogesh.marathe at intel.com>
>>Cc: mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
>>Subject: Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 2/3] egl: Wrap dri3 surface primitive around dri2
>>egl surface
>>
>>On Friday, 2017-09-15 12:06:57 +0530, yogesh.marathe at intel.com wrote:
>>> From: Yogesh Marathe <yogesh.marathe at intel.com>
>>>
>>> Originally dri3 egl surface was wrapped around _EGLSurface. To support
>>> explicit sync, new variables (e.g. enable_out_fence) were added to
>>> dri2_egl_surface. As we reference these new variables we write on to
>>> dri3 loader bits. These get toggled later in execution due to dri3
>>> loader. This results in enable_out_fence to have garbage value and
>>> further triggers an assert on dri3 platforms even where fences are not
>>> supported in kernel.
>>>
>>> Thanks to Rafael Antognolli, Emil Velikov and Mark Janes for catching
>>> and root causing this.
>>>
>>> Tested with Intel Mesa CI.
>>
>>I assume you only tested the result of the 3 patches combined, because I'm pretty
>>sure mesa can't compile after patches 1/3 and 2/3: 1/3 makes use of the
>>s/base/surf.base/ change before this patch does that change, and with this patch
>>(2/3) the changes in 3/3 are needed as well.
>>
>>Please run
>>$ git rebase --interactive --exec make origin/master on your branch to make sure
>>each commit compiles.
>
> Ok. Yes I tested the result combined. My assumption was these three will always be
> applied or reverted together. 2/3 and 3/3 can't be separated anyways, but I split
> them based on irc discussion.
>
> I'll run the command you've mentioned so 1/3 will be compliable individually and
> 2/3, 3/3 together. I hope that’s fine.
>
Seems like you've went in the opposite direction to what I mentioned on IRC.
There's a few rules which apply to nearly every project:
 - though shalt not intentionally break code, only to fix it with
sequential commit
 - though shalt not merge logically separate changes into the same patch

There's expeptions of course, but on an extremely rare situations.
I'll follow up exactly on each each/how it could be split.

-Emil