2010/7/28 Rafa? Mi?ecki <zajec5 at gmail.com>: > W dniu 28 lipca 2010 01:01 u?ytkownik Alex Deucher > <alexdeucher at gmail.com> napisa?: >> 2010/7/27 Rafa? Mi?ecki <zajec5 at gmail.com>: >>> W dniu 27 lipca 2010 17:27 u?ytkownik Alex Deucher >>> <alexdeucher at gmail.com> napisa?: >>>> I'm an idiot. ?The sampler state needs to be there as it's not emitted >>>> subsequently; ?I was thinking it got emitted with the texture fetch >>>> constants like it does in the ddx. ?That was the issue all along. >>>> Thanks for tracking that down. ?New set of patches: >>>> http://people.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/reduce_emit/ >>> >>> Following refers to patches from ? ? ? ?27-Jul-2010 08:26. >>> >>> After applying all 7 patches I get hard lockup on suspend (not even >>> resume!). I decided to apply one by one to track this down. >>> >>> Applying 0001 and 0002 doesn't cause any problem. >>> >>> After applying 0003 (on top of 0001 and 0002) I get hard lockup just >>> like in case of all patches. Attached patch shows which part of 0003 >>> has to be reverted to make suspending (and resuming) work. I think >>> it's still not minimal patch (maybe reverting just part of that code >>> would be enough) but hope it's small enough to give you some idea. >> >> Sorry, the count was wrong on that packet. ?New set of patches at the >> same location: >> http://people.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/reduce_emit/ >> Only 0003 had changed. > > Success this time! :) Thanks for fixing this.
Thanks for sticking with it and dealing with my stupid typos ;) Alex
