On 06/04/2011 04:29 PM, Chad Versace wrote:
On 06/03/2011 03:33 PM, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
Do we need to emit 3DSTATE_STENCIL_BUFFER with all 0's in the stencil_irb ==
NULL case? Ditto for HiZ I guess. Just being a
bit paranoid.
The test results for these paranoiac cases pass, so paranoia is unneeded. Regarding
"Do we need to emit 3DSTATE_STENCIL_BUFFER
with all 0's in the stencil_irb == NULL case", see tests:
* hiz-depth-test-fbo-d24-s0 : column 6
* hiz-depth-stencil-fbo-d24-s0 : columns 3, 6
Regarding "Ditto for HiZ", the following test runs emit a stencil buffer but no
hiz buffer:
* hiz-stencil-test-fbo-d0-s8 : column 6
* hiz-stencil-read-fbo-d0-s8 : column 6
* hiz-depth-stencil-fbo-d0-s8 : column 6
Hrm. I was thinking of a slightly more elaborate case: Render to an FBO
that has both depth and stencil...then render to another FBO that only
has depth. The question is: would the old stencil buffer stay
programmed and somehow get used. Although come to think of it, I think
the "Separate Stencil Enable" bit in 3DSTATE_DEPTH_BUFFER ought to be
sufficient. So it's probably okay.
On your suggestion, I added this hunk to the patch.
diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_wm_surface_state.c
b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_wm_surface_state.c
index 5dadb5b..f560bc3 100644
--- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_wm_surface_state.c
+++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_wm_surface_state.c
@@ -169,6 +169,7 @@ translate_tex_format(gl_format mesa_format,
return BRW_SURFACEFORMAT_L16_UNORM;
case MESA_FORMAT_S8_Z24:
+ case MESA_FORMAT_X8_Z24:
/* XXX: these different surface formats don't seem to
* make any difference for shadow sampler/compares.
*/
Thanks!
Reviewed-by: Kenneth Graunke <kenn...@whitecape.org>
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
