[Piglit] [PATCH 0/3] Fix some program input / output issues with ARB_piq

[Ian Romanick]

On 05/26/2016 11:55 AM, Ian Romanick wrote:
> On 05/26/2016 08:01 AM, Martin Peres wrote:
>> On 26/05/16 01:36, Ian Romanick wrote:
>>> After spending about a week with dEQP, GL_OES_shader_io_blocks, and
>>> GL_OES_geometry_shader, I believe there are some errors with the
>>> expectations of our existing ARB_piq tests.  I have included spec
>>> justifications for the changes, and the changes match tests that I have
>>> seen in dEQP.
>>>
>>> I would really like to know the before / after results of the updated
>>> test on modern NVIDIA and AMD closed-source drivers.
>>
>> Thanks for doing this! Here are the result on GeForce GT 430/PCIe/SSE2,
>> NVIDIA 355.11
>>
>> $ ./piglit summary console -d before/ after
>> spec/arb_program_interface_query/arb_program_interface_query-resource-query/GL_PROGRAM_INPUT(gs):
>> pass fail
>> spec/arb_program_interface_query/arb_program_interface_query-resource-query/GL_PROGRAM_INPUT(gs,fs):
>> pass fail
>> spec/arb_program_interface_query/arb_program_interface_query-resource-query/GL_PROGRAM_INPUT(tcs):
>> pass fail
>> spec/arb_program_interface_query/arb_program_interface_query-resource-query/GL_PROGRAM_INPUT(tcs,tes):
>> pass fail
>> spec/arb_program_interface_query/arb_program_interface_query-resource-query/GL_PROGRAM_INPUT(tes):
>> pass fail
> 
> Interesting... is it just that they don't have gl_PerVertex on things,
> or is the arrayness also different?  I want to put proper annotations in
> the commit messages.

If you want to just send the output of "after"
'bin/arb_program_interface_query-resource-query -auto' on that system, I
should be able to figure out what to put in the commit message.

>> Martin