On Wed 18 Nov 2015, Ben Widawsky wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:28:27AM -0800, Chad Versace wrote: > > On Tue 17 Nov 2015, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > > The logic in the table works a bit differently than the other columns in > > > the > > > table and therefore deserves a small mention. For most other features, > > > the GEN > > > which began implementing it is set, and it is assumed future gens also > > > support > > > this. For this feature, GEN9 actually eliminates support for certain > > > formats. We > > > could use this column to determine support for the similar feature on > > > older > > > generation hardware. Aside from that being an error prone task which is > > > unrelated to enabling this on GEN9, it becomes somewhat tricky to > > > implement > > > because of the fact that surface format support diminishes. You'd > > > probably want > > > another column to cleanly implement it. > > > > Does the above paragraph still apply to the table's ccs_e column? > > I understand your patch series, the ccs_e column behaves identically to > > all other columns: > > > > feature_is_supported == (10 * gen >= table[format].feature) > > > > The patch's diff looks good to me. My only remaining questions/issues > > with the patch are the ones stated in this message. > > Yes. As Topi pointed this out too, I agree. With the changes your requested, > this part of the commit message needs to be removed. Ok, with that portion of the commit message dropped, this patch is Reviewed-by: Chad Versace <chad.vers...@intel.com> I retract my CCS_E feedback for this patch. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
