On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 5:25 PM, Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> wrote: > On June 25, 2017 1:40:09 PM Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > >> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> Anyone have thoughts on this? Am I being foolish for trying to hold >>>> onto GL_RGBA4 texturing? (Any decision here also affects st/nine.) >>> >>> >>> >>> Yes. Chances are that you're also doing texture views wrong. Are there >>> any >>> 4444 formats supported on nvidia hardware? >> >> >> Well, any permutation of a 4444 format is easily supportable for >> texturing. >> >> What's wrong with the texture views? Should be fine... unless I'm >> missing something. It's really just this issue with RB <-> Texture >> copies where the RB's internal format is GL_RGBA4 while the *real* >> internal format is RGBA8. Texture views between e.g. RGB565 and >> RGBA4444 should work fine (and the fb will fail to validate as one >> might expect if one were to attach a GL_RGBA4 texture view of a >> GL_RGB565 texture). > > > But what if you have a 4444 and you render to as 4444 and then try to > texture from it as 565?
If you have a 4444 texture and attach it to a FB, then that FB will not be complete. So you can't render to it in the first place. -ilia _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
