On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 11:26, Emil Velikov emil.l.velikov@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 11:04, Eric Engestrom eric.engestrom@intel.com wrote:
On Wednesday, 2019-01-23 10:45:17 +0000, Emil Velikov wrote:
From: Emil Velikov emil.velikov@collabora.com
Some devices can lack OF data or it may not be available in the uevent file. Fallback to the MODALIAS data in those cases.
We strip any leading "MODALIAS=.*:" thus the resulting information is compatible with existing code in Mesa.
Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov emil.velikov@collabora.com
xf86drm.c | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xf86drm.c b/xf86drm.c index 10df682b..374734eb 100644 --- a/xf86drm.c +++ b/xf86drm.c @@ -3511,15 +3511,28 @@ free_device: static int drmParsePlatformBusInfo(int maj, int min, drmPlatformBusInfoPtr info) { #ifdef __linux__
- char path[PATH_MAX + 1], *name;
- char path[PATH_MAX + 1], *name, *foo;
I assume you didn't mean to send this patch yet? :P
Thanks Eric, I intentionally sent it out. Mind was blank thinking for a reasonable variable name :-\ Suggestions are more than welcome.
For reference with this patch drmdevice and other drmDevice API users list:
- VGEM, needs "drm/vgem: Fix vgem_init to get drm device available."
- in v5.0 only :'-(
- etnaviv, after "drm/etnaviv: remove the need for a gpu-subsystem DT
node" landed in v4.17/18
Christian can you please test that this patches brings etnaviv back to the list? Above is a reasonable assumption, yet assumption never the less.
I've only tested VGEM.
Thanks Emil