[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 02/16] util: simplify a few things in util_can_blit_via_copy_region()

[Brian Paul]

On 06/29/2016 06:02 PM, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> Am 29.06.2016 um 01:52 schrieb Brian Paul:
>> Since only the src box can have negative dims for flipping, just
>> comparing the src/dst box sizes is enough to detect flips.
>> ---
>>   src/gallium/auxiliary/util/u_surface.c | 20 ++++++++------------
>>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/gallium/auxiliary/util/u_surface.c b/src/gallium/auxiliary/util/u_surface.c
>> index 8d22bcf..e2229bc 100644
>> --- a/src/gallium/auxiliary/util/u_surface.c
>> +++ b/src/gallium/auxiliary/util/u_surface.c
>> @@ -701,21 +701,20 @@ util_can_blit_via_copy_region(const struct pipe_blit_info *blit)
>>         return FALSE;
>>      }
>>
>> -   /* No masks, no filtering, no scissor. */
>> +   /* No masks, no filtering, no scissor, no blending */
>>      if ((blit->mask & mask) != mask ||
>>          blit->filter != PIPE_TEX_FILTER_NEAREST ||
>> -       blit->scissor_enable) {
>> +       blit->scissor_enable ||
>> +       blit->alpha_blend) {
>>         return FALSE;
>>      }
>>
>> -   /* No flipping. */
>> -   if (blit->src.box.width < 0 ||
>> -       blit->src.box.height < 0 ||
>> -       blit->src.box.depth < 0) {
>> -      return FALSE;
>> -   }
>> +   /* Only the src box can have negative dims for flipping */
>> +   assert(blit->dst.box.width >= 1);
>> +   assert(blit->dst.box.height >= 1);
>> +   assert(blit->dst.box.depth >= 1);
>>
>> -   /* No scaling. */
>> +   /* No scaling or flipping */
>>      if (blit->src.box.width != blit->dst.box.width ||
>>          blit->src.box.height != blit->dst.box.height ||
>>          blit->src.box.depth != blit->dst.box.depth) {
>> @@ -736,9 +735,6 @@ util_can_blit_via_copy_region(const struct pipe_blit_info *blit)
>>         return FALSE;
>>      }
>>
>> -   if (blit->alpha_blend)
>> -      return FALSE;
>> -
>>      return TRUE;
>>   }
>>
>>
>
> Now that you've simplified this, it looks to me like it should also
> check for the new num_window_rectangle blit property.

Yes, I'll do that in a follow-on commit.


> But in any case
> this isn't your fault, for 1-3:
> Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger <sroland at vmware.com>

Thanks.

-Brian