<div dir="ltr">Michel,<br><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Michel Dänzer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:michel@daenzer.net" target="_blank">michel@daenzer.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 07.08.2014 02:02, Jason Ekstrand wrote:<br>
> Michael,<br>
<br>
Close, but no cigar. :)<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'm sorry about that. I must have read too quickly. :-/<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="">
<br>
> Could you please point me at the failing tests.<br>
<br>
</div>spec/!OpenGL 1.1/depthstencil-default_fb-drawpixels-FLOAT-and-USHORT<br>
spec/!OpenGL 1.1/draw-pixels<br>
spec/!OpenGL 1.1/stencil-drawpixels<br>
spec/!OpenGL 1.4/copy-pixels<br>
spec/ARB_depth_buffer_float/fbo-depthstencil-GL_DEPTH32F_STENCIL8-drawpixels-FLOAT-and-USHORT<br>
spec/ARB_depth_buffer_float/fbo-stencil-GL_DEPTH32F_STENCIL8-drawpixels<br>
spec/EXT_framebuffer_object/fbo-stencil-GL_STENCIL_INDEX1-drawpixels<br>
spec/EXT_framebuffer_object/fbo-stencil-GL_STENCIL_INDEX16-drawpixels<br>
spec/EXT_framebuffer_object/fbo-stencil-GL_STENCIL_INDEX14-drawpixels<br>
spec/EXT_framebuffer_object/fbo-stencil-GL_STENCIL_INDEX8-drawpixels<br>
spec/EXT_packed_depth_stencil/fbo-depthstencil-GL_DEPTH24_STENCIL8-drawpixels-FLOAT-and-USHORT<br>
spec/EXT_packed_depth_stencil/fbo-stencil-GL_DEPTH24_STENCIL8-drawpixels<br>
<br>
(The total number of regressions is around 20 because some of these are<br>
run for several numbers of samples)<br>
<div class=""><br>
<br>
> I don't have a radeon, but I can run with llvmpipe or dri swrast and<br>
> try to find the bug that way.<br>
<br>
</div>At least the draw-pixels test indeed regressed with llvmpipe as well.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The draw pixels regression on llvmpipe is different. The changes I made to texture upload included a subtle change in the way we handle signed input data. In older GL versions there were two formulas, one which mapped [-128, 127] to [-1, 1] and one which mapped [-127, 127] to [-1, 1]. The former formula was used when uploading a non-snorm texture from signed integer data or when doing operations such as DrawPixels and ReadPixels. In GL 4.3, this first formula is going away and we will only have the later formula. (The later formula has the advantage of mapping 0 to 0.) If we think it's needed, I can add code to the swizzle_and_convert function to be able to handle the legacy formula in those cases where older GL versions say that it's needed.<br>
</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Would it be possible for you to verify that there are no piglit gpu.py<br>
regressions with llvmpipe before pushing changes like these?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yeah, I'm going to get my personal testing infrastructure set up to make that easier and hopefully I can do so in the future.<br>
<br></div><div>--Jason Ekstrand<br></div><div> </div></div></div></div></div>