<div dir="ltr">I seem to remember this, it was nvidia I think, if that helps you look for the email. </div><div class="gmail_extra"> <div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Ian Romanick <<a href="mailto:idr@freedesktop.org" target="_blank">idr@freedesktop.org</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">There is at least one bigger bug in this series, and fixing it will require changes to shader-runner too. I had some e-mail either from one of the guys at VMware or one of the guys at NVIDIA, but I can't find it. My recollection is that there is some case in the generator (and shader-runner in general) that expects non-base elements of arrays to be advertised, but the spec says they should not be advertised. I think the case was that for a UBO like struct S { int i; float f; }; uniform U { S s[4]; }; only s[0].i and s[0].f would be reported, but shader-runner expects all elements of s[] to be reported. This will be annoying to fix because shader-runner relies on this to determine the offsets s[1].i and friends. It should be relatively easy to figure out what the failure case is. I think there's already a test in piglit that misuses the feature, and that test fails on NVIDIA's closed-source driver. <div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"> On 01/12/2016 03:09 PM, Ilia Mirkin wrote: > My fixes are one-liners (might just be one, I forget). At this point I > would very much like to see *anything* checked in, and we can improve > from there. > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Dylan Baker <<a href="mailto:baker.dylan.c@gmail.com">baker.dylan.c@gmail.com</a>> wrote: >> That sounds like a plan. Would you like to get Ian's original scripts >> merged, and I'll update the cleanups I have for his scripts and send them >> out? >> >> Dylan >> >> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Timothy Arceri <<a href="mailto:t_arceri@yahoo.com.au">t_arceri@yahoo.com.au</a>> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, 2015-11-10 at 16:46 -0800, Dylan Baker wrote: >>>> Since gravy is so delicious, >>>> >>>> <a href="https://github.com/dcbaker/piglit.git" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/dcbaker/piglit.git</a> wip/ubo-fuzzer >>>> >>>> bin/piglit run ubo-fuzzer output >>>> >>>> Obviously it's not at all feature complete, it's more proof of >>>> concept >>>> than anything else, but gravy. >>> >>> Hi Dylan, >>> >>> I took a quick look at your branch and I'd like to suggest a way >>> forward on this. >>> >>> It looks like you made a bunch of small/fixes tidy ups to Ian's >>> scripts, how about we get those sent out for review/comment then commit >>> the script to the main piglit repo. >>> >>> Ilia and I can then rebase our modifications, resend for review and >>> commit those. >>> >>> Then we can worry about gravy once we have all the work in one place. >>> >>> How does that sound? >>> >>> Tim >>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 03:01 11AM -0500, Ilia Mirkin wrote: >>>>> That's a full step ahead of my suggestion. I just want the thing in >>>>> a >>>>> shared place so that I can run it when doing dodgy things to code I >>>>> don't understand... if there's some automated process running it, >>>>> that's just gravy on top. >>>>> >>>> [snip] >> > _______________________________________________ > Piglit mailing list > <a href="mailto:Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org">Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org</a> > <a href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit</a> </div></div></blockquote></div> </div>