On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 2:24 AM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11 June 2016 at 17:02, Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> wrote: > > > The next 20 patches or so are general ISL cleanups and fixes. If no one > is > > too opposed, I'd like to back-port the whole pile to 12.0. There are two > > reasons for this: First, ISL is new and this is a substantial cleanup; > > back-porting it will make back-porting will keep the initial release of > ISL > > cleaner and make back-porting other patches easier in the future. > Second, > > in the middle of the series are a couple of changes that fix some 850 > > Vulkan CTS tests on Haswell. > > > No serious objections on getting these in 12.0. A bunch of small > suggestions though. > > > i965/gen4: Subtract 1 from buffer sizes > Please polish the commit message a bit. > I added "The PRM states that the values put in Width, Height, and Depth should be various bits from the value size - 1. We seem to have done this wrong more-or-less from the start." > > isl/state: Put surface format setup at the top > > isl/state: Put all dimension setup together and towards the top > > isl/state: Put pitch calculations together > Are these solely for cosmetic/ease of read reasons or there's > something more to it ? Can you please mention in the commit message ? > How about: "This is purely cosmetic, but it makes things look a bit more readable." <https://www.khronos.org/registry/spir-v/specs/1.1/SPIRV.html#Integer> <https://www.khronos.org/registry/spir-v/specs/1.1/SPIRV.html#Floating> > > genxml: Add enough XML for gens 4, 4.5, and 5 to get SURFACE_STATE > Let me see if I can quickly cook something for the Android build. > > > > isl: Add support for filling out surface states all the way back to > > gen4 > Ditto. > If you want to give me something, I'm happy to squash it in. > > > isl/formats: Mark RAW as having a block size of 1 byte > Worth mentioning why we want that ? > That patch can actually be dropped. The original idea was that, for buffer surfaces, we needed to divide by the element size so the size should be non-zero. Turns out we need to divide by stride so it can be 0 and the patch isn't needed. I'll defer to Chad on whether it should be 0 or 1. > Thanks > Emil >
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
