On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Eduardo Lima Mitev <el...@igalia.com> wrote: > On 09/28/2015 08:25 PM, Jason Ekstrand wrote: >> Eduardo, >> Is there anything here still awaiting review? I thought I reviewed it all. >> --Jason >> > > Hi, > > Sorry for the delays, I'm on holidays for a couple weeks. > > Jason, all patches in the series are reviewed by you. Thanks! > > Mark, I guess your Tested-By means it is safe to push the series > already. I was waiting for green light from testing/CI side because of > the 3 regressed dEQP tests. > > I will prepare the patches and ask somebody from the team to push them.
No need. I went ahead and pushed them. > Eduardo > >> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Mark Janes <mark.a.ja...@intel.com> wrote: >>> Tested-by: Mark Janes <mark.a.ja...@intel.com> >>> >>> Eduardo Lima Mitev <el...@igalia.com> writes: >>> >>>> This is a new version of the series that attempt to fix the regression >>>> reported at: >>>> >>>> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=91582 >>>> >>>> The review by Jason helped me uncover the fact that the following 3 dEQP >>>> tests are buggy: >>>> >>>> dEQP-GLES2.functional.negative_api.texture.texsubimage2d_neg_offset >>>> dEQP-GLES2.functional.negative_api.texture.texsubimage2d_offset_allowed >>>> dEQP-GLES2.functional.negative_api.texture.texsubimage2d_neg_wdt_hgt >>>> >>>> So the patch split I did in the previous version of the series (v4) was >>>> actually not necessary. It was just a work-around to the failure of these >>>> tests, which this series uncovered. >>>> >>>> Now in this new version, I dropped the splitted patch and filed a bug >>>> against dEQP (together with a reference patch) to fix the above tests, >>>> which will start to fail once/if we merge this series. >>>> >>>> "[dEQP] Buggy negative API tests that check dimensions args of >>>> glTexSubImage2D" >>>> <https://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=187348&thanks=187348&ts=1443083425> >>>> >>>> I filed it against the AOSP project, where dEQP package is (under >>>> external/deqp). Lets see if that was correct. >>>> >>>> Mark, in the mean time we can probably apply the patch I attached to the >>>> bug report, otherwise the regression originally reported won't go away. >>>> What do you think? >>>> >>>> Notice that first two patches has R-b from Jason already. Only the patch >>>> 3/3 is pending review. >>>> >>>> The question that remains is whether I should cc Mesa 10.6 stable too, >>>> apart from 11.0. >>>> >>>> cheers, >>>> >>>> Eduardo Lima Mitev (3): >>>> mesa: Fix order of format+type and internal format checks for >>>> glTexImageXD ops >>>> mesa: Move _mesa_base_tex_format() from teximage to glformats files >>>> mesa: Use the effective internal format instead for validation >>>> >>>> src/mesa/main/glformats.c | 656 >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> src/mesa/main/glformats.h | 2 + >>>> src/mesa/main/teximage.c | 415 ++--------------------------- >>>> src/mesa/main/teximage.h | 4 - >>>> 4 files changed, 683 insertions(+), 394 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 2.4.6 >> > _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
