On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 12:35 PM, Józef Kucia <joseph.ku...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 4:42 PM Danylo Piliaiev > <danylo.pilia...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> @@ -1546,8 +1548,8 @@ update_image_surface(struct brw_context *brw, >> .format = format, >> .base_level = obj->MinLevel + u->Level, >> .levels = 1, >> - .base_array_layer = obj->MinLayer + u->_Layer, >> - .array_len = num_layers, >> + .base_array_layer = base_layer, >> + .array_len = num_layers - base_layer, >> .swizzle = ISL_SWIZZLE_IDENTITY, >> .usage = ISL_SURF_USAGE_STORAGE_BIT, >> }; > > This sets the "array_len" to the number of layers remaining in the > original texture. Shouldn't it take into account the number of layers > in the GL texture view?
Errr, right. Here is the logic in st/mesa, which I believe is correct. (But convoluted. Because there are so many bits to it.) https://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/tree/src/mesa/state_tracker/st_atom_image.c#n101 -ilia _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
