On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 10:13:57AM +0100, Iago Toral wrote: > On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 11:04 +0200, Pohjolainen, Topi wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 07:44:43AM +0100, Iago Toral wrote: > > > On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 11:15 -0700, Mark Janes wrote: > > > > Iago Toral <ito...@igalia.com> writes: > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2016-03-09 at 09:54 +0200, Pohjolainen, Topi wrote: > > > > >> On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 10:48:49AM +0100, Samuel Iglesias Gons?lvez > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > Hello, > > > > >> > > > > > >> > There is only one patch from this series that has been reviewed > > > > >> > (patch > > > > >> > 1). > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Our plans is to start sending patches for adding fp64 support to > > > > >> > i965 > > > > >> > driver in the coming weeks but they depend on these patches. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Can someone take a look at them? ;) > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Sam > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Thu, 2015-12-17 at 14:44 +0100, Samuel Iglesias Gonsálvez wrote: > > > > >> > > Hello, > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > This patch series is a updated version of the one Iago sent last > > > > >> > > week [0] that includes patches for gen6 too, as suggested by > > > > >> > > Jason. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > We checked the gen9 code paths that work with a horizontal width > > > > >> > > of 4 > > > > >> > > and we think there won't be any regression on gen9... but we > > > > >> > > don't > > > > >> > > have any gen9 machine to run piglit with these patches. Can > > > > >> > > someone > > > > >> > > check it? > > > > >> > > > > >> I rebased it and ran it through the test system, gen9 seems to be > > > > >> fine, I > > > > >> only got one regression, and that was on old g965: > > > > >> > > > > >> /tmp/build_root/m64/lib/piglit/bin/ext_framebuffer_multisample-accuracy > > > > >> all_samples srgb depthstencil -auto -fbo > > > > >> Pixels that should be unlit > > > > >> count = 236444 > > > > >> RMS error = 0.025355 > > > > >> Pixels that should be totally lit > > > > >> count = 13308 > > > > >> Perfect output > > > > >> The error threshold for unlit and totally lit pixels test is 0.016650 > > > > >> Pixels that should be partially lit > > > > >> count = 12392 > > > > >> RMS error = 0.273876 > > > > >> The error threshold for partially lit pixels is 0.333000 > > > > >> Samples = 0, Result = fail > > > > > > > > > > I managed to borrow gen4 hardware to test this. According to glxinfo: > > > > > Mesa DRI Mobile Intel GM45 Express Chipset > > > > > > > > > > but it does not fail for me... never. I left this test running in a > > > > > loop > > > > > for 5 minutes and it never failed. Also, looking at the problem > > > > > described in the output you pasted above, it seems that the problem > > > > > was > > > > > related to precision calculations and it looks rather odd that our > > > > > execsize patches could've compromised the precision of anything... > > > > > > > > > > Mark, would it be possible for you or someone else to run the piglit > > > > > test mentioned by Topi above on gen4 hardware against this Mesa > > > > > branch?: > > > > > https://github.com/Igalia/mesa/tree/i965-fix-execsize > > > > > > > > I ran this branch through our CI, and it passed all tests. My > > > > recollection is that ext_framebuffer_multisample-accuracy occasionally > > > > fails on g965. I would not attribute any failure of that test to this > > > > branch. > > > > > > Great, thanks Matt! > > > > > > Topi: in that case I guess we can say there are no regressions in any > > > gen, right? Do you have any other comments to the branch? We have merged > > > the comments you made so far in case you want to double-check that we > > > did not miss anything. > > > > Right. We identified two piglit failures, one on hsw and this one on g965. > > The former is intermittent and reproducible with current mesa master. Now > > that we have answer for the latter also, I concur, your series should be > > regression free. > > > > I can take a look if you have a branch somewhere. I only had a few minor > > comments in the first place and the series looks good to me. But I'll double > > check. > > Thanks! You can see the updated patches in this branch: > https://github.com/Igalia/mesa/tree/i965-fix-execsize
Thanks Iago, I gave it a test spin and saw no regression. The series: Reviewed-by: Topi Pohjolainen <topi.pohjolai...@intel.com> _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
