On 07/09/2018 16:32, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Danylo Piliaiev
<danylo.pilia...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 9/7/18 5:48 PM, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Danylo Piliaiev
<danylo.pilia...@gmail.com> wrote:
Comment for array_len field states:
   "Indicates the number of array elements starting at
     Base Array Layer."

And most usages of array_len expect it to be equal or less than
   total layers - base layer

Fixes: 5a8c8903
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107856

Signed-off-by: Danylo Piliaiev <danylo.pilia...@globallogic.com>
---
   src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_wm_surface_state.c | 6 ++++--
   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_wm_surface_state.c
b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_wm_surface_state.c
index 42af41aca3..6adf4a5836 100644
--- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_wm_surface_state.c
+++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_wm_surface_state.c
@@ -1539,6 +1539,8 @@ update_image_surface(struct brw_context *brw,
         } else {
            struct intel_texture_object *intel_obj =
intel_texture_object(obj);
            struct intel_mipmap_tree *mt = intel_obj->mt;
+
+         const unsigned base_layer = obj->MinLayer + u->_Layer;
            const unsigned num_layers = u->Layered ?
               get_image_num_layers(mt, obj->Target, u->Level) : 1;

@@ -1546,8 +1548,8 @@ update_image_surface(struct brw_context *brw,
               .format = format,
               .base_level = obj->MinLevel + u->Level,
               .levels = 1,
-            .base_array_layer = obj->MinLayer + u->_Layer,
-            .array_len = num_layers,
+            .base_array_layer = base_layer,
+            .array_len = num_layers - base_layer,
See above - num_layers can be 1 if the image isn't bound as a layered
image. But base layer can be whatever -- so this will end up as
negative. I think the adjustment needs to be done only for the
u->Layered case.
Oh, I see it now, thanks! Unless Lionel's patch for this issue is better
I'll send v2 of my patch.
I believe yours is much closer to right. Lionel's was conceptually
wrong. (Or I'm the one who's confused - reminder - I'm not an Intel
driver developer, and ultimately won't approve or reject your patches.
But I will point out things that I think are off.)

   -ilia
_


Yep, looks like I don't really understand the relationship between LOD, depth and layers...

_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Reply via email to