Hi,
On 25.08.2017 00:30, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2017 4:16:39 AM PDT kevin.rogo...@intel.com wrote:
From: Kevin Rogovin <kevin.rogo...@intel.com>
Special thanks to Eero Tamminen for reporting rasterizer
numbers being twice what it should be for 2xMSAA under
a benchmark.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Rogovin <kevin.rogo...@intel.com>
Nice catch! Thanks for fixing this.
Reviewed-by: Kenneth Graunke <kenn...@whitecape.org>
Ian requested that I run this through a full CTS run before pushing, so
that we actually hit all the new visuals, and make sure 2x/16x works as
expected. Assuming that comes back green, I'll plan to push this.
Note that based on current intel_screen.c code:
-----------------------------------------
const int*
intel_supported_msaa_modes(const struct intel_screen *screen)
{
static const int gen9_modes[] = {16, 8, 4, 2, 0, -1};
static const int gen8_modes[] = {8, 4, 2, 0, -1};
static const int gen7_modes[] = {8, 4, 0, -1};
static const int gen6_modes[] = {4, 0, -1};
static const int gen4_modes[] = {0, -1};
...
------------------------------------------
Kevin's patch should have separate case for gen8, for adding 2xMSAA.
(I thought Kevin was going to send new version of the patch, but I
didn't see it on the list.)
- Eero
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
