[Mesa-dev] [PATCH] mesa: fix maximum allowed proxy texture size condition

[Anuj Phogat]

On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Brian Paul <brianp at vmware.com> wrote:

> On 02/09/2012 01:57 PM, Brian Paul wrote:
>
>> On 02/09/2012 12:15 PM, Anuj Phogat wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Ian Romanick <idr at freedesktop.org
>>> <mailto:idr at freedesktop.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 02/09/2012 08:14 AM, Brian Paul wrote:
>>>
>>> Anuj,
>>>
>>> The patch you committed (15986d2), the first version you
>>> posted that tests:
>>>
>>> if (width < 2 * border || width > maxSize)
>>> return GL_FALSE;
>>>
>>> causes my copy of conform (mustpass.c / proxy texture test) to
>>> fail with
>>> swrast/softpipe/llvmpipe. It passes w/ NVIDIA's driver.
>>>
>>> I thought you were going to commit the patch that does:
>>>
>>> if (width < 2 * border || width > 2 * border + maxSize)
>>> return GL_FALSE;
>>>
>>> That allows conform to pass here.
>>>
>>>
>>> Allow me to remove the egg from my face. I dug a bit deeper into
>>> the test case that was previously failing and conform / mustpass.
>>> What I said before
>>> (http://lists.freedesktop.org/**__archives/mesa-dev/2012-__**
>>> February/018562.html<http://lists.freedesktop.org/__archives/mesa-dev/2012-__February/018562.html>
>>>
>>> <http://lists.freedesktop.org/**archives/mesa-dev/2012-**
>>> February/018562.html<http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2012-February/018562.html>
>>> >)
>>>
>>> was wrong. You and Jose were correct. Sorry.
>>>
>>
>> No biggie.
>>
>>
>>  Intel oglconform test case (max_values
>>> negative.textureSize.**textureCube) also passes with the patch i earlier
>>> posted as per Brian's comments:
>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/**archives/mesa-dev/2012-**
>>> January/018410.html<http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2012-January/018410.html>
>>> <%20http://lists.freedesktop.**org/archives/mesa-dev/2012-**
>>> January/018410.html<http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2012-January/018410.html>
>>> >
>>>
>>> I'll make the required changes as per this patch.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks, the test passes again. But I have a follow-up comment for the
>> patch in question...
>>
>
> Actually, this isn't directly related to your patch- the issue is with
> texture borders and array textures.
>
> For a 1D texture array, the border only applies to the width.  For a 2D
> texture array the border applies to the width and height but not the depth.
>  We're not handling this correctly everywhere.  For example, in
> _mesa_init_teximage_fields() we compute the 'Height2' field like this:
>
>   if (height == 1) { /* 1-D texture */
>      img->Height2 = 1;
>      img->HeightLog2 = 0;
>   }
>   else {
>      img->Height2 = height - 2 * border; /* == 1 << img->HeightLog2; */
>      img->HeightLog2 = _mesa_logbase2(img->Height2);
>   }
>
> The else clause does the wrong thing if the texture is a 1D array texture
> with a border.  Similarly for Depth2 and 2D array textures.
>
> Granted, borders are seldom used, but it would be good to go over all the
> teximage code and fix these mistakes.
>

yes, i agree. I'll send out a separate patch to fix such cases in  teximage
code.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/attachments/20120209/c1094a86/attachment.html>