[Mesa-dev] [RFC PATCH 1/4] driconf: add new force_compat_profile option

[Marek Olšák]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Marek Olšák <maraeo at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Samuel Pitoiset
> <samuel.pitoiset at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 02/13/2017 04:51 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Samuel Pitoiset
>>> <samuel.pitoiset at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 02/10/2017 10:05 PM, Emil Velikov wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10 February 2017 at 21:04, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Samuel,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10 February 2017 at 13:41, Samuel Pitoiset
>>>>>> <samuel.pitoiset at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mesa currently doesn't allow to create 3.1+ compatibility profiles
>>>>>>> mainly because various features are unimplemented and bugs can
>>>>>>> happen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, some buggy apps request a compat profile without using
>>>>>>> any old features but they fail to start because Mesa clamps the
>>>>>>> GLSL version to 130 for compat.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Afaict this statement matches the implementation, yet both differ from
>>>>>> the override name.
>>>>>> The implementation below is "force_glsl_compat_version".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think it's not unreasonable to have both - force_compat_profile and
>>>>>> force_glsl_compat_version.
>>>>>>
>>>>> s/force_glsl_compat_version/do_not_cap_glsl_compat_version/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would prefer force_glsl_compat_version.
>>>
>>>
>>> The patch really enables compat profiles higher than 3.0. The
>>> GLSLVersion check reduces the GLSL version, which in turn reduces the
>>> GL version.
>>
>>
>> so, force_compat_profile as I suggested initially makes more sense to you?
>
> Sort of. It doesn't really force a compat profile. It only allows
> higher GL versions for compat profiles.
>
> Marek

You have my Rb whether or not you change the name.

Marek