Hi Chris, On Friday, 23 November 2018 16:12:38 CET Chris Wilson wrote: > > Something to note here is that valgrind reports > (piglit/bin/drawoverhead): > > ==492== Use of uninitialised value of size 8 > ==492== at 0x6EB8FA9: cso_hash_find_node (cso_hash.c:198) > ==492== by 0x6EB9026: cso_hash_insert (cso_hash.c:213) > ==492== by 0x6EB6730: cso_set_vertex_elements (cso_context.c:1092) > ==492== by 0x714C76F: set_vertex_attribs (st_atom_array.c:384) > ==492== by 0x714C76F: st_update_array (st_atom_array.c:512) > ==492== by 0x71073F3: st_validate_state (st_atom.c:261) > ==492== by 0x70615D1: prepare_draw (st_draw.c:123) > ==492== by 0x70615D1: st_draw_vbo (st_draw.c:149) > ==492== by 0x70F5BF4: _mesa_validated_drawrangeelements (draw.c:850) > ==492== by 0x70F5BF4: _mesa_validated_drawrangeelements (draw.c:782) > ==492== by 0x70F5F32: _mesa_DrawElements (draw.c:1004) > ==492== by 0x48F6C74: stub_glDrawElements (piglit-dispatch-gen.c:12618) > ==492== by 0x10B3F4: draw (drawoverhead.c:275) > ==492== by 0x10D070: perf_measure_rate (common.c:56) > ==492== by 0x10C69E: perf_run (drawoverhead.c:645) > ==492== Uninitialised value was created by a stack allocation > ==492== at 0x714C25D: st_update_array (st_atom_array.c:389) > > from velements being used sparsely. > > Does your patch prevent this?
I tried to reproduce this, but valgrind does not show any failures with drawoverhead on radeonsi. What driver backend do you use? best Mathias > -Chris _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
