On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 10:44 -0800, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> Samuel Iglesias Gonsálvez writes:
>
> > On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 18:28 -0800, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> > > Francisco Jerez writes:
> > >
> > > > ---
> > > > This replaces "[PATCH v2 09/20] i965/fs: indirect addressing
> > > > with
> > > >
Samuel Iglesias Gonsálvez writes:
> On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 10:16 -0800, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> ---
>> This replaces "[PATCH v2 09/20] i965/fs: indirect addressing with
>> doubles is not supported in IVB/BYT".
>>
>> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_generator.cpp | 27
>>
Samuel Iglesias Gonsálvez writes:
> On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 18:28 -0800, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> Francisco Jerez writes:
>>
>> > ---
>> > This replaces "[PATCH v2 09/20] i965/fs: indirect addressing with
>> > doubles is not supported in IVB/BYT".
>> >
>>
>> Note that some of the fp64 indirect
On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 10:16 -0800, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> ---
> This replaces "[PATCH v2 09/20] i965/fs: indirect addressing with
> doubles is not supported in IVB/BYT".
>
> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_generator.cpp | 27
> --
> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 2 de
On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 18:28 -0800, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> Francisco Jerez writes:
>
> > ---
> > This replaces "[PATCH v2 09/20] i965/fs: indirect addressing with
> > doubles is not supported in IVB/BYT".
> >
>
> Note that some of the fp64 indirect addressing test-cases still fail
> on
> IVB e
Francisco Jerez writes:
> ---
> This replaces "[PATCH v2 09/20] i965/fs: indirect addressing with
> doubles is not supported in IVB/BYT".
>
Note that some of the fp64 indirect addressing test-cases still fail on
IVB even with this patch applied, but the reason doesn't seem to have
anything to do
---
This replaces "[PATCH v2 09/20] i965/fs: indirect addressing with
doubles is not supported in IVB/BYT".
src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_generator.cpp | 27 --
1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_generator.cpp
