On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 01:49:21 +0000
Alyssa Rosenzweig <aly...@rosenzweig.io> wrote:
> @@ -1793,22 +1799,9 @@ panfrost_set_vertex_buffers(
> const struct pipe_vertex_buffer *buffers)
> {
> struct panfrost_context *ctx = pan_context(pctx);
> - assert(num_buffers <= PIPE_MAX_ATTRIBS);
> -
> - /* XXX: Dirty tracking? etc */
> - if (buffers) {
> - size_t sz = sizeof(buffers[0]) * num_buffers;
> - ctx->vertex_buffers = malloc(sz);
> - ctx->vertex_buffer_count = num_buffers;
> - memcpy(ctx->vertex_buffers, buffers, sz);
> - } else {
> - if (ctx->vertex_buffers) {
> - free(ctx->vertex_buffers);
> - ctx->vertex_buffers = NULL;
> - }
>
> - ctx->vertex_buffer_count = 0;
> - }
> + util_set_vertex_buffers_mask(ctx->vertex_buffers, &ctx->vb_mask,
> buffers, start_slot, num_buffers);
> + ctx->vertex_buffer_count = num_buffers;
->vertex_buffer_count should be set to fls(ctx->vb_mask) (fls == find
last bit set) if you want the
for (int i = 0; i < ctx->vertex_buffer_count; ++i)
loop in panfrost_emit_vertex_data() to do the right thing. But I think
we can get rid of ->vertex_buffer_count entirely and just do a
for (int i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(ctx->vertex_buffers); ++i)
> }
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
