On 10/10/2012 07:42 AM, Jose Fonseca wrote:
I think certain versions of SPEC viewperf rely on NV_vertex_program. See
http://www.mesa3d.org/viewperf.html
We had some internal hacks to support just the bare minimum of to run some of
these tests, but they were not accepted on mesa proper. (There is some bug
report on fdo about it).
Jose
Ugh. I'd forgotten about SPECviewperf.
I guess this begs the question: do we care?
According to that page, viewperf11 is a buggy application (using
extensions without checking for them), and to get it working properly,
we'd need to implement two more legacy extensions that aren't necessary
for anything else. Or add the minimum required and driconf workarounds
to falsely advertise them.
In my experience, viewperf is extremely frustrating to work with and
isn't useful for testing either correctness nor performance. The only
reason anyone appears to care is that it's some kind of "industry
standard" benchmark. These days, however, it seems more people care
about glbenchmark.com's benchmarks, 3DMarkMobileES 2.0, and various
games. At least on my team, no one is measuring us against SPECviewperf.
Do people still care about viewperf on your side?
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
