On Thu 01 Sep 2016, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 8:29 PM, Nanley Chery <nanleych...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Chad Versace <chad.vers...@intel.com>
>
> Nanley Chery (amend):
> - Remove wip! tag
>
> Signed-off-by: Nanley Chery <nanley.g.ch...@intel.com>
> ---
> src/intel/vulkan/anv_private.h | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> +static inline bool
> +anv_image_has_hiz(const struct anv_image *image)
> +{
> + /* We must check the usage because anv_image::hiz_surface belongs to
> + * a union.
> + */
> + return (image->usage & VK_IMAGE_USAGE_DEPTH_STENCIL_ATTACHMENT_BIT) &&
>
>
> Would checking (image->aspects & VK_IMAGE_ASPECT_DEPTH_BIT) be more
> appropriate?
I agree. VK_IMAGE_ASPECT_DEPTH_BIT makes more sense.
Also, that's what the documentation for anv_image says, quoted below:
struct anv_image {
...
/**
* Image subsurfaces
*
* For each foo, anv_image::foo_surface is valid if and only if
* anv_image::aspects has a foo aspect.
*
* ...
*/
union {
struct anv_surface color_surface;
struct {
struct anv_surface depth_surface;
struct anv_surface stencil_surface;
};
};
};
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
