On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Grazvydas Ignotas wrote:
> But the original code only did 0, so maybe it's better to do it as a
> followup patch, so that functional change is separate from
> refactoring?
Yeah, no problem.
Marek
___
mesa-dev mailing li
But the original code only did 0, so maybe it's better to do it as a
followup patch, so that functional change is separate from
refactoring?
Gražvydas
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 12:30 AM, Marek Olšák wrote:
> The "workaround for a missing scissor enable on r600" must be applied
> to all scissors,
The "workaround for a missing scissor enable on r600" must be applied
to all scissors, not just 0. That is, if scissor.enable is changed,
all scissors must be marked as dirty.
Marek
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 2:24 AM, Grazvydas Ignotas wrote:
> As suggested by Marek Olšák, we can use single atom to
As suggested by Marek Olšák, we can use single atom to track all scissor
states. This will allow to simplify dirty atom handling later.
---
src/gallium/drivers/r600/evergreen_state.c | 33 ++---
src/gallium/drivers/r600/r600_blit.c | 2 +-
src/gallium/drivers/r600/r600_h
