<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" />
</head>
<body><span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:kenneth@whitecape.org" title="Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>"> <span class="fn">Kenneth Graunke</span></a>
</span> changed
<a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_ASSIGNED "
title="ASSIGNED - Surfaces not drawn in Unvanquished"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85529">bug 85529</a>
<br>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8">
<tr>
<th>What</th>
<th>Removed</th>
<th>Added</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align:right;">Status</td>
<td>NEW
</td>
<td>ASSIGNED
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align:right;">CC</td>
<td>kenneth@whitecape.org
</td>
<td>idr@freedesktop.org
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align:right;">Assignee</td>
<td>idr@freedesktop.org
</td>
<td>kenneth@whitecape.org
</td>
</tr></table>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_ASSIGNED "
title="ASSIGNED - Surfaces not drawn in Unvanquished"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85529#c9">Comment # 9</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_ASSIGNED "
title="ASSIGNED - Surfaces not drawn in Unvanquished"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85529">bug 85529</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:kenneth@whitecape.org" title="Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>"> <span class="fn">Kenneth Graunke</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to vcelestialragev from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=85529#c4">comment #4</a>)
<span class="quote">> Created <span class=""><a href="attachment.cgi?id=110839" name="attach_110839" title="A patch that "fixes" the issue">attachment 110839</a> <a href="attachment.cgi?id=110839&action=edit" title="A patch that "fixes" the issue">[details]</a></span>
> A patch that "fixes" the issue
>
> The patch just partially reverts the original commit that introduced the
> regression. It is probably not a proper fix but my help provide clues about
> where the problem actually occurs.</span >
I'm pretty sure your patch is correct, actually.
After ~2 hours of staring at the code, and adding some assertions, I realized
that if we have multiple _mesa_prims and somehow don't flag BRW_NEW_VERTICES on
the second one, brw_try_draw_prims resets start/base_vertex_location to
prim[i].{start,basevertex}, but we don't call
brw_prepare_shader_draw_parameters, so we fail to add in
brw->vb.start_vertex_bias and brw->ib.start_vertex_offset when processing
subsequent primitives.
Your patch makes us no longer add brw->vb.start_vertex_bias to the value of
gl_BaseVertexARB. However, I think we aren't *supposed* to add it in the first
place, so the patch actually fixes two bugs.
I'd like to revert more, restoring more of the older/simpler code. I'll send
out a patch shortly.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>