On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Samuel Pitoiset
<samuel.pitoi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 11/09/2015 07:40 PM, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu>
>> ---
>> docs/GL3.txt | 2 +-
>> docs/relnotes/11.1.0.html | 1 +
>> src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_screen.c | 2 +-
>> src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_surface.c | 82
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 4 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/docs/GL3.txt b/docs/GL3.txt
>> index 7abdcd8..da0ffca 100644
>> --- a/docs/GL3.txt
>> +++ b/docs/GL3.txt
>> @@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ GL 4.4, GLSL 4.40:
>>
>> GL_MAX_VERTEX_ATTRIB_STRIDE DONE (all
>> drivers)
>> GL_ARB_buffer_storage DONE (i965, nv50,
>> nvc0, r600, radeonsi)
>> - GL_ARB_clear_texture DONE (i965)
>> (gallium - in progress, VMware)
>> + GL_ARB_clear_texture DONE (i965, nvc0)
>> GL_ARB_enhanced_layouts in progress
>> (Timothy)
>> - compile-time constant expressions in progress
>> - explicit byte offsets for blocks in progress
>> diff --git a/docs/relnotes/11.1.0.html b/docs/relnotes/11.1.0.html
>> index 11fbdff..33fd0b8 100644
>> --- a/docs/relnotes/11.1.0.html
>> +++ b/docs/relnotes/11.1.0.html
>> @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ Note: some of the new features are only available with
>> certain drivers.
>> <ul>
>> <li>GL_ARB_arrays_of_arrays on i965</li>
>> <li>GL_ARB_blend_func_extended on freedreno (a3xx)</li>
>> +<li>GL_ARB_clear_texture on nvc0</li>
>> <li>GL_ARB_copy_image on nv50, nvc0, radeonsi</li>
>> <li>GL_ARB_gpu_shader_fp64 on r600 for Cypress/Cayman/Aruba chips</li>
>> <li>GL_ARB_gpu_shader5 on r600 for Evergreen and later chips</li>
>> diff --git a/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_screen.c
>> b/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_screen.c
>> index f2e3bf0..fbeec7f 100644
>> --- a/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_screen.c
>> +++ b/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_screen.c
>> @@ -182,6 +182,7 @@ nvc0_screen_get_param(struct pipe_screen *pscreen,
>> enum pipe_cap param)
>> case PIPE_CAP_COPY_BETWEEN_COMPRESSED_AND_PLAIN_FORMATS:
>> case PIPE_CAP_FORCE_PERSAMPLE_INTERP:
>> case PIPE_CAP_SHAREABLE_SHADERS:
>> + case PIPE_CAP_CLEAR_TEXTURE:
>> return 1;
>> case PIPE_CAP_SEAMLESS_CUBE_MAP_PER_TEXTURE:
>> return (class_3d >= NVE4_3D_CLASS) ? 1 : 0;
>> @@ -204,7 +205,6 @@ nvc0_screen_get_param(struct pipe_screen *pscreen,
>> enum pipe_cap param)
>> case PIPE_CAP_VERTEXID_NOBASE:
>> case PIPE_CAP_RESOURCE_FROM_USER_MEMORY:
>> case PIPE_CAP_DEVICE_RESET_STATUS_QUERY:
>> - case PIPE_CAP_CLEAR_TEXTURE:
>> return 0;
>>
>> case PIPE_CAP_VENDOR_ID:
>> diff --git a/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_surface.c
>> b/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_surface.c
>> index 5f47bad..3ae9943 100644
>> --- a/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_surface.c
>> +++ b/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_surface.c
>> @@ -319,6 +319,8 @@ nvc0_clear_render_target(struct pipe_context *pipe,
>> PUSH_DATA(push, dst->u.tex.first_layer + sf->depth);
>> PUSH_DATA(push, mt->layer_stride >> 2);
>> PUSH_DATA(push, dst->u.tex.first_layer);
>> +
>> + IMMED_NVC0(push, NVC0_3D(MULTISAMPLE_MODE), mt->ms_mode);
>> } else {
>> if (res->base.target == PIPE_BUFFER) {
>> PUSH_DATA(push, 262144);
>> @@ -540,6 +542,7 @@ nvc0_clear_depth_stencil(struct pipe_context *pipe,
>> PUSH_DATA (push, (unk << 16) | (dst->u.tex.first_layer + sf->depth));
>> BEGIN_NVC0(push, NVC0_3D(ZETA_BASE_LAYER), 1);
>> PUSH_DATA (push, dst->u.tex.first_layer);
>> + IMMED_NVC0(push, NVC0_3D(MULTISAMPLE_MODE), mt->ms_mode);
>>
>> BEGIN_NIC0(push, NVC0_3D(CLEAR_BUFFERS), sf->depth);
>> for (z = 0; z < sf->depth; ++z) {
>> @@ -550,6 +553,84 @@ nvc0_clear_depth_stencil(struct pipe_context *pipe,
>> nvc0->dirty |= NVC0_NEW_FRAMEBUFFER;
>> }
>>
>> +static void
>> +nvc0_clear_texture(struct pipe_context *pipe,
>> + struct pipe_resource *res,
>> + unsigned level,
>> + const struct pipe_box *box,
>> + const void *data)
>> +{
>> + struct nv50_miptree *mt = nv50_miptree(res);
>> + struct nv50_surface sf = {{{0}}};
>
>
> I'm just curious about this, does '= {}' is not enough?
I wanted to be *really* sure it got initialized... figured 3 sets was enough :)
But seriously -- allegedly some compilers don't like that. I can't be
bothered to check on the actual situation, so I'm including the 0 in
there. And gcc wanted more {} since the first field was a struct whose
first field was a struct, etc.
-ilia
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
