[Piglit] [v4 4/4] tests: spec: tests for EXT_image_dma_buf_import

[Eric Anholt]

"Pohjolainen, Topi" <topi.pohjolainen at intel.com> writes:

> On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 10:54:12AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 04:57:49PM -0700, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> > > +#define fourcc_code(a,b,c,d) ((uint32_t)(a) | ((uint32_t)(b) << 8) | \
>> > > +				((uint32_t)(c) << 16) | ((uint32_t)(d) << 24))
>> > > +#define DRM_FORMAT_ARGB8888 fourcc_code('A', 'R', '2', '4')
>> > 
>> > This is in many subtests, and should pretty clearly be in a header.
>> 
>> That thing is in the drm_fourcc.h kernel userspace header. Do we just need
>> a check to make sure the linux-headers are recent enough?
>
> I tried to keep the tests platform independent, and this was to avoid any need
> for libdrm inclusions there. (One checks for particular driver and platform
> in the framework and uses their settings for inclusions and libraries).
>
> I could add a common header if you like. But then again there are a quite a bit
> of other things in all the tests that one could start refactoring, and these
> one-liners weren't on top of my list.

I think only building these tests on HAVE_LIBDRM and using libdrm
headers is totally appropriate -- dma_bufs are a DRM feature, and any
implementation of them will have those drm headers.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/piglit/attachments/20130503/8102c365/attachment.pgp>