Hello, Mark. I've done: Cc, Tested-by and Reviewed-by also added. On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 8:16 AM, Mark Janes <mark.a.ja...@intel.com> wrote:
> This patch passes Intel's CI suites. > It needs a CC for stable in the commit message. > > Tested-by: Mark Janes <mark.a.ja...@intel.com> > > Sergii Romantsov <sergii.romant...@gmail.com> writes: > > > Gen8+ use 48-bit address relocations so need to extend the sign > > to 64-bit return value. Without it we have higher bits zeroed > > and missing the negavive values. > > Haswell and older use 32-bit deltas so are unaffected by this issue. > > > > v2: > > used int32_t fucntion parameter instead of explicit type conversion. > > > > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101408 > > Signed-off-by: Sergii Romantsov <sergii.romant...@globallogic.com> > > Tested-by: Andriy Khulap <andriy.khu...@globallogic.com> > > --- > > src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_batchbuffer.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_batchbuffer.c > b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_batchbuffer.c > > index ebc02ff..7286140 100644 > > --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_batchbuffer.c > > +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_batchbuffer.c > > @@ -1079,7 +1079,7 @@ brw_batch_references(struct intel_batchbuffer > *batch, struct brw_bo *bo) > > static uint64_t > > emit_reloc(struct intel_batchbuffer *batch, > > struct brw_reloc_list *rlist, uint32_t offset, > > - struct brw_bo *target, uint32_t target_offset, > > + struct brw_bo *target, int32_t target_offset, > > unsigned int reloc_flags) > > { > > assert(target != NULL); > > -- > > 2.7.4 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mesa-dev mailing list > > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev >
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
