On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 6:44 PM Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > > 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
There is also view_num_layers in brw_update_texture_surface(). It could be adapted. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
