On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 7:36 AM, Francisco Jerez <curroje...@riseup.net> wrote: > Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> writes: > >> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:43 AM, Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: >>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:42 AM, Francisco Jerez <curroje...@riseup.net> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> writes: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Francisco, >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm looking at some piglit failures on nv10... full run at >>>>>> >>>>>> http://people.freedesktop.org/~imirkin/nv10-comparison/problems.html >>>>>> >>>>>> The specific one is: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://people.freedesktop.org/~imirkin/nv10-comparison/nv18-imirkin/spec/!OpenGL%201.1/copyteximage%201D.html >>>>>> >>>>>> Which fails in nouveau_choose_tex_format for GL_DEPTH24_STENCIL8. And >>>>>> indeed, that case isn't handled. Looking through the #defines, I see a >>>>>> NV20_3D_TEX_FORMAT_FORMAT_Z24 but not for the earlier versions. And >>>>>> even in the nv20 case, it's not actually used in the driver. >>>>>> >>>>>> Does that mean that EXT_packed_depth_stencil should never have been >>>>>> enabled on nouveau? I do see that it's a valid renderbuffer format >>>>>> though. [It is now always enabled, since commit a92b9e60, but at the >>>>>> time of the commit, it was also enabled for everything. >>>>>> >>>>>> Any advice? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> AFAICT EXT_packed_depth_stencil only requires the implementation to >>>>> support GL_DEPTH_STENCIL for texturing if ARB_depth_texture is supported >>>>> in addition -- which, as you guessed correctly, could be supported on >>>>> nv20 or higher. >>>>> >>>>> Shouldn't the piglit test be checking if the implementation supports >>>>> depth texturing before doing that? >>>> >>>> Mmmaybe. But that's not such a big deal -- worst case, the piglit >>>> should get a gl error of some sort. Sounds like the real issue is that >>>> mesa core is letting the values through to the driver. I'll re-read >>>> EXT_packed_depth_stencil more carefully, I didn't see the >>>> ARB_depth_texture dependency, but I only scanned it very quickly. >>> >>> Aha, and in _mesa_base_tex_format, we have >>> >>> if (ctx->Extensions.ARB_depth_texture) { >>> switch (internalFormat) { >>> case GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT: >>> case GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT16: >>> case GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT24: >>> case GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT32: >>> return GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT; >>> default: >>> ; /* fallthrough */ >>> } >>> } >>> >>> followed by >>> >>> switch (internalFormat) { >>> case GL_DEPTH_STENCIL: >>> case GL_DEPTH24_STENCIL8: >>> return GL_DEPTH_STENCIL; >>> default: >>> ; /* fallthrough */ >>> } >>> >>> And I think you're right about these only being available for >>> ARB_depth_texture: >>> >>> If ARB_depth_texture or SGIX_depth_texture is >>> supported, GL_DEPTH_STENCIL_EXT/GL_UNSIGNED_INT_24_8_EXT data can >>> also be used for textures; this provides a more efficient way to >>> supply data for a 24-bit depth texture. >>> >>> This doesn't reference GL_DEPTH24_STENCIL8 explicitly, but I can only >>> assume that's a spec bug. >> >> Hmmmm... OTOH, that's perhaps more correctly interpreted as "You can >> pass GL_DEPTH_STENCIL data to a GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT texture". Which >> would in turn mean that EXT_packed_depth_stencil does require >> GL_DEPTH_STENCIL texture support... >> > > Why would they do something like that? If ARB_depth_texture is not > supported, I don't see how it would make sense to forbid "passing" Z24S8 > data to a texture, but still require support for it as internal format.
I think it's more like saying that if you _do_ have ARB_depth_texture, then even though the ARB_depth_texture spec says nothing about letting data passed to glTexImage2D being in Z24X8 format, you can still do that for a texture with a DEPTH_COMPONENT internal format, instead of it being in the unaligned Z24 format. > > I just checked what the nvidia blob does: It exposes > EXT_packed_depth_stencil on nv1x and it doesn't support depth texturing, > just like we do. If this is a live system (rather than a saved-off glxinfo), mind running the piglit test that I referenced originally and see what it says for the GL_DEPTH_STENCIL bit? Perhaps they do something clever to enable depth texturing... -ilia _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
