<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - [Regression, bisected] spec.ext_transform_feedback.structs_gles3 tests fail" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90961#c4">Comment # 4</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - [Regression, bisected] spec.ext_transform_feedback.structs_gles3 tests fail" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90961">bug 90961</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:t_arceri@yahoo.com.au" title="Timothy Arceri <t_arceri@yahoo.com.au>"> Timothy Arceri</a> <pre>(In reply to Ian Romanick from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=90961#c3">comment #3</a>) > Basically, the ES group interpreted the line differently than the desktop > group. There was discussion about this while bringing arrays-of-arrays to > ES, and that precipitated the clarification in the desktop spec. Thanks for clearing this up Ian. > > Frankly, unless there is a conformance test or a dEQP test that requires the > restricted behavior, I'd rather not start enforcing it. Since the code is > already landed, it's probably not worth the effort to undo it. I added it because it seemed related to arrays of arrays, if you can't have an array of structs or nested structs then you can't have arrays of arrays of nested structs. I don't mind undoing it if you think its a good idea. > My best > guess is that we should just remove the gles3 tests that require out-of-spec > behavior. On the up side all the tests have a desktop version so not much is lost. > > Also... if a patch series is known to cause a big pile of tests to fail (you > did run piglit before pushing, right?), that needs to be resolved first. Yeah I didn't know I'd cased so many tests to fail until Mark pointed it out on IRC. Turns out I didn't have ES enabled in my piglit build.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>