On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 00:00:26 +0100
Ben Avison <bavi...@riscosopen.org> wrote:
Same problems with the patch summary. The "Add extra test and fix an
existing one" message is not very descriptive.
> in_reverse_8888_8888 is one of the more commonly used operations in the
> cairo-perf-trace suite that hasn't been in lowlevel-blt-bench until now.
OK.
> The source for over_reverse_n_8888 needed to be marked as solid.
That's a nice catch. But this bugfix could be perhaps applied as a
standalone patch.
> ---
> test/lowlevel-blt-bench.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/test/lowlevel-blt-bench.c b/test/lowlevel-blt-bench.c
> index 1049e21..3da094a 100644
> --- a/test/lowlevel-blt-bench.c
> +++ b/test/lowlevel-blt-bench.c
> @@ -713,7 +713,8 @@ tests_tbl[] =
> { "outrev_n_8888_1555_ca", PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8, 1, PIXMAN_OP_OUT_REV,
> PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8, 2, PIXMAN_a1r5g5b5 },
> { "outrev_n_8888_x888_ca", PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8, 1, PIXMAN_OP_OUT_REV,
> PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8, 2, PIXMAN_x8r8g8b8 },
> { "outrev_n_8888_8888_ca", PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8, 1, PIXMAN_OP_OUT_REV,
> PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8, 2, PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8 },
> - { "over_reverse_n_8888", PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8, 0,
> PIXMAN_OP_OVER_REVERSE, PIXMAN_null, 0, PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8 },
> + { "over_reverse_n_8888", PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8, 1,
> PIXMAN_OP_OVER_REVERSE, PIXMAN_null, 0, PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8 },
> + { "in_reverse_8888_8888", PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8, 0, PIXMAN_OP_IN_REVERSE,
> PIXMAN_null, 0, PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8 },
> { "pixbuf", PIXMAN_x8b8g8r8, 0, PIXMAN_OP_SRC,
> PIXMAN_a8b8g8r8, 0, PIXMAN_a8r8g8b8 },
> { "rpixbuf", PIXMAN_x8b8g8r8, 0, PIXMAN_OP_SRC,
> PIXMAN_a8b8g8r8, 0, PIXMAN_a8b8g8r8 },
> };
--
Best regards,
Siarhei Siamashka
_______________________________________________
Pixman mailing list
Pixman@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pixman
