On 10/10/17 10:02, Eric Anholt wrote:
Timothy Arceri writes:
On 10/10/17 09:31, Eric Anholt wrote:
Timothy Arceri writes:
We won't split varyings marked as always active because there
is no point in doing so. This means we need to mark both
sides of the interface as always active otherwise
Timothy Arceri writes:
> On 10/10/17 09:31, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> Timothy Arceri writes:
>>
>>> We won't split varyings marked as always active because there
>>> is no point in doing so. This means we need to mark both
>>> sides of the interface as always active otherwise we will have
>>> a mis
On 10/10/17 09:31, Eric Anholt wrote:
Timothy Arceri writes:
We won't split varyings marked as always active because there
is no point in doing so. This means we need to mark both
sides of the interface as always active otherwise we will have
a mismatch and start removing things we shouldn't.
Timothy Arceri writes:
> We won't split varyings marked as always active because there
> is no point in doing so. This means we need to mark both
> sides of the interface as always active otherwise we will have
> a mismatch and start removing things we shouldn't.
Is this just needed because the
We won't split varyings marked as always active because there
is no point in doing so. This means we need to mark both
sides of the interface as always active otherwise we will have
a mismatch and start removing things we shouldn't.
---
src/compiler/glsl/link_varyings.cpp | 13 ++---
1 fil
