plans to support more advanced viewing of textures?

[José Fonseca]

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:38 PM, <io.github.apitrace at io7m.com> wrote:

> 'Lo.
>
> All of your proposed improvements sound good!
>
> On RG textures:
>
> On 2015-01-05T23:00:58 +0000
> José Fonseca <jose.r.fonseca at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Additionally, it seems as though it often fails to display RG textures
> > > properly, although this is a separate issue that I'll be filing a bug
> > > for as soon as I can come up with a minimal test case.
> > >
> >
> > The GUI assumes one channel means Intensity (not R) and two channels
> means
> > Luminance-Alpha, not RG.  That said, I thought I had fixed this now (R/RG
> > textures will be dumped as RGB, with B==0, so the R and G colors don't
> get
> > reinterpreted)
>
> The issue I'm seeing is this: When an RG texture is bound as a color
> attachment of a framebuffer, apitrace seems to show the contents of the
> attachment as:
>
>   http://waste.io7m.com/2015/01/06/rg.png
>
> But when the texture that backs that color attachment is later bound to
> a texture unit, apitrace shows the contents as:
>
>   http://waste.io7m.com/2015/01/06/rg_correct.png
>
> There are no actual rendering issues, the latter image is accurate. I'm
> still trying to come up with a minimal case that reliably reproduces
> it, as it doesn't always seem to happen. It's also fairly recent
> behaviour; I update to HEAD every few weeks or so.


Stride is wrong somehow.

If you can provide a .trace + call number where this can be seen, that's
all I need.

Jose
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/apitrace/attachments/20150106/5e786945/attachment.html>