On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 8:52 AM, Francisco Jerez <curroje...@riseup.net> wrote: > Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> writes: > >> Reviewed-by: Topi Pohjolainen <topi.pohjolai...@intel.com> >> --- >> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.h | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.h >> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.h >> index d4cc43d..d94a842 100644 >> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.h >> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.h >> @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ offset(fs_reg reg, const brw::fs_builder& bld, unsigned >> delta) >> case MRF: >> case ATTR: >> return byte_offset(reg, >> - delta * MAX2(reg.width * reg.stride, 1) * >> + delta * bld.dispatch_width() * reg.stride * > > Er... This doesn't look right for stride == 0. If you keep the > MAX2(.., 1) expression this patch is:
I don't think offset() even makes sense for something with stride == 0. I added "assert(stride != 0)" right above the byte_offset() call and it passed Jenkins. Would that be an acceptable alternative? --Jason > Reviewed-by: Francisco Jerez <curroje...@riseup.net> > >> type_sz(reg.type)); >> case UNIFORM: >> reg.reg_offset += delta; >> -- >> 2.4.3 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mesa-dev mailing list >> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
