This patch series fixes a few dEQP tests on braswell. The rest of the platform are unaffected, according to my tests.
deqp-gles2.functional.negative_api.texture.teximage2d_invalid_type deqp-gles2.functional.negative_api.texture.teximage2d_invalid_internalformat deqp-gles3.functional.negative_api.texture.teximage2d Since the dEQP regressions listed in the bug have been found to be due to a poorly written test, someone will need to take the action to resolve this discrepancy with Google. I don't expect AOSP to be the project which can resolve this test bug. Jason, Alex, and Kaveh: can you figure out how to address this issue? -Mark Eduardo Lima Mitev <el...@igalia.com> writes: > This is a new version of the series that attempt to fix the regression > reported at: > > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=91582 > > The review by Jason helped me uncover the fact that the following 3 dEQP > tests are buggy: > > dEQP-GLES2.functional.negative_api.texture.texsubimage2d_neg_offset > dEQP-GLES2.functional.negative_api.texture.texsubimage2d_offset_allowed > dEQP-GLES2.functional.negative_api.texture.texsubimage2d_neg_wdt_hgt > > So the patch split I did in the previous version of the series (v4) was > actually not necessary. It was just a work-around to the failure of these > tests, which this series uncovered. > > Now in this new version, I dropped the splitted patch and filed a bug against > dEQP (together with a reference patch) to fix the above tests, which will > start to fail once/if we merge this series. > > "[dEQP] Buggy negative API tests that check dimensions args of > glTexSubImage2D" > <https://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=187348&thanks=187348&ts=1443083425> > > I filed it against the AOSP project, where dEQP package is (under > external/deqp). Lets see if that was correct. > > Mark, in the mean time we can probably apply the patch I attached to the bug > report, otherwise the regression originally reported won't go away. What do > you think? > > Notice that first two patches has R-b from Jason already. Only the patch 3/3 > is pending review. > > The question that remains is whether I should cc Mesa 10.6 stable too, apart > from 11.0. > > cheers, > > Eduardo Lima Mitev (3): > mesa: Fix order of format+type and internal format checks for > glTexImageXD ops > mesa: Move _mesa_base_tex_format() from teximage to glformats files > mesa: Use the effective internal format instead for validation > > src/mesa/main/glformats.c | 656 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > src/mesa/main/glformats.h | 2 + > src/mesa/main/teximage.c | 415 ++--------------------------- > src/mesa/main/teximage.h | 4 - > 4 files changed, 683 insertions(+), 394 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.4.6 _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
