[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

--- Comment #12 from asimiklit  ---
(In reply to Ian Romanick from comment #9)
> Comment on attachment 119006 [details] [review]
> egl: distnguish between unsupported api vs capabilities for EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS
> 
> Review of attachment 119006 [details] [review]:
> -
> 
> There are a few things wrong with this patch.  First, you can't check the
> version when you see EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS in the attribs list because the
> application could specify the requested version after flags.  This should
> not generate an error:
> 
> EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS, EGL_CONTEXT_OPENGL_FORWARD_COMPATIBLE_BIT_KHR,
> EGL_CONTEXT_CLIENT_VERSION, 3,
> 0
> 
> Second, it is not correct to generate EGL_BAD_MATCH for
> EGL_CONTEXT_OPENGL_ROBUST_ACCESS_BIT_KHR when
> EGL_EXT_create_context_robustness is not supported.  Think of it this way...
> if we deleted all support and knowledge of
> EGL_EXT_create_context_robustness, what error would be generated?  Default
> case in the switch statement says EGL_BAD_ATTRIBUTE.

I suggest to improve this test in the following way:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/256081/

(In reply to Vinson Lee from comment #11)
> mesa: 1e8435ce0cce671024ebf9c5465ea8bdcb563b69 (master 11.3.0-devel)
> This regression is still present.

The possible mesa fix was suggested:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/256063/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

Vinson Lee  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Version|git |11.1

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

--- Comment #11 from Vinson Lee  ---
mesa: 1e8435ce0cce671024ebf9c5465ea8bdcb563b69 (master 11.3.0-devel)

This regression is still present.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

--- Comment #9 from Ian Romanick  ---
Comment on attachment 119006
  --> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=119006
egl: distnguish between unsupported api vs capabilities for EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS

Review of attachment 119006:
-

There are a few things wrong with this patch.  First, you can't check the
version when you see EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS in the attribs list because the
application could specify the requested version after flags.  This should not
generate an error:

EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS, EGL_CONTEXT_OPENGL_FORWARD_COMPATIBLE_BIT_KHR,
EGL_CONTEXT_CLIENT_VERSION, 3,
0

Second, it is not correct to generate EGL_BAD_MATCH for
EGL_CONTEXT_OPENGL_ROBUST_ACCESS_BIT_KHR when EGL_EXT_create_context_robustness
is not supported.  Think of it this way... if we deleted all support and
knowledge of EGL_EXT_create_context_robustness, what error would be generated? 
Default case in the switch statement says EGL_BAD_ATTRIBUTE.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

--- Comment #8 from Ian Romanick  ---
(In reply to Boyan Ding from comment #4)
> (In reply to Matthew Waters from comment #2)
> > Created attachment 119006 [details] [review] [review]
> > egl: distnguish between unsupported api vs capabilities for 
> > EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS
> > 
> > This fixes that issue for me.
> 
> Well, your patch does seem to eliminate the problem, but there is a subtle
> difference between how things works now and before, which I think may be
> questionable.
> 
> The spec of EGL_KHR_create_context says:
> requesting a forward-compatible context for OpenGL versions less
> than 3.0 will generate an error
> 
> The code now takes "OpenGL version" above as version requested with EGL (1.0
> by default). However, the OpenGL version actually provided can be up to 3.0.

I'm not really sure what you're asking.  If the create-context call (either EGL
or GLX) does not specify a version, it is as though it specified 1.0.  It
follows that not specifying a version and requesting a forward-compatible
context should generate an error.

I think the GLX spec is pretty clear that BadMatch is generated.  It is also
quite clear that the error is based on the value of the explicitly or
implicitly requested API version.

  * If attributes GLX_CONTEXT_MAJOR_VERSION_ARB and
GLX_CONTEXT_MINOR_VERSION_ARB, when considered together with
attributes GLX_CONTEXT_FORWARD_COMPATIBLE_BIT_ARB and
GLX_RENDER_TYPE, specify an OpenGL version and feature set that
are not defined, BadMatch is generated.

The defined versions of OpenGL at the time of writing are OpenGL
1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.0, 2.1, 3.0, 3.1, and 3.2.
Feature deprecation was introduced with OpenGL 3.0, so
forward-compatible contexts may only be requested for OpenGL 3.0
and above. Thus, examples of invalid combinations of attributes
include:

  - Major version < 1 or > 3
  - Major version == 1 and minor version < 0 or > 5
  - Major version == 2 and minor version < 0 or > 1
  - Major version == 3 and minor version > 2
  - Forward-compatible flag set and major version < 3
  - Color index rendering and major version >= 3

Because the purpose of forward-compatible contexts is to allow
application development on a specific OpenGL version with the
knowledge that the app will run on a future version, context
creation will fail if GLX_CONTEXT_FORWARD_COMPATIBLE_BIT_ARB is
set and the context version returned cannot implement exactly
the requested version.

That is at least what I intended to implement in the GLX code.

The language in the EGL extension is almost identical:

  * If an OpenGL context is requested and the values for attributes
EGL_CONTEXT_MAJOR_VERSION_KHR and EGL_CONTEXT_MINOR_VERSION_KHR,
when considered together with the value for attribute
EGL_CONTEXT_OPENGL_FORWARD_COMPATIBLE_BIT_KHR, specify an OpenGL
version and feature set that are not defined, than an
EGL_BAD_MATCH error is generated.

The defined versions of OpenGL at the time of writing are OpenGL
1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.0, 2.1, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 4.0, 4.1,
4.2, and 4.3. Feature deprecation was introduced with OpenGL
3.0, so forward-compatible contexts may only be requested for
OpenGL 3.0 and above. Thus, examples of invalid combinations of
attributes include:

  - Major version < 1 or > 4
  - Major version == 1 and minor version < 0 or > 5
  - Major version == 2 and minor version < 0 or > 1
  - Major version == 3 and minor version < 0 or > 2
  - Major version == 4 and minor version < 0 or > 3
  - Forward-compatible flag set and major version < 3

Because the purpose of forward-compatible contexts is to allow
application development on a specific OpenGL version with the
knowledge that the app will run on a future version, context
creation will fail if
EGL_CONTEXT_OPENGL_FORWARD_COMPATIBLE_BIT_KHR is set and the
context version returned cannot implement exactly the requested
version.


> In such case, your patch will fail to create forward-compatible context,
> giving the "appropriate" error, while mesa before 86ccb2a1 will succeed.
> Though both behaviors pass piglit.
> 
> Any ideas?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

--- Comment #10 from Matthew Waters  ---
(In reply to Ian Romanick from comment #9)
> Comment on attachment 119006 [details] [review]
> egl: distnguish between unsupported api vs capabilities for EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS
> 
> Review of attachment 119006 [details] [review]:
> -
> 
> There are a few things wrong with this patch.  First, you can't check the
> version when you see EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS in the attribs list because the
> application could specify the requested version after flags.  This should
> not generate an error:
> 
> EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS, EGL_CONTEXT_OPENGL_FORWARD_COMPATIBLE_BIT_KHR,
> EGL_CONTEXT_CLIENT_VERSION, 3,
> 0

Right, will fix.

> Second, it is not correct to generate EGL_BAD_MATCH for
> EGL_CONTEXT_OPENGL_ROBUST_ACCESS_BIT_KHR when
> EGL_EXT_create_context_robustness is not supported.  Think of it this way...
> if we deleted all support and knowledge of
> EGL_EXT_create_context_robustness, what error would be generated?  Default
> case in the switch statement says EGL_BAD_ATTRIBUTE.

Not sure what you're trying to say here.

Couple of interpretations:
1. Unknown bit in EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS -> specs are pretty clear that
EGL_BAD_ATTRIBUTE should be returned
2. EGL_CONTEXT_OPENGL_ROBUST_ACCESS_BIT_KHR is only defined for OpenGL contexts
(not ES) -> taken care of previously and will return EGL_BAD_ATTRIBUTE.
3. Removing support for EGL_EXT_create_context_robustness is not the same as
removing support for GL_ARB_robustness.  My question then is, do we have a way
we can check for GL_ARB_robustness from the egl code or is it always (not?)
supported?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

Bug ID: 92552
   Summary: [softpipe] piglit
egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl
regression
   Product: Mesa
   Version: git
  Hardware: x86-64 (AMD64)
OS: Linux (All)
Status: NEW
  Keywords: bisected, regression
  Severity: normal
  Priority: medium
 Component: Mesa core
  Assignee: mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
  Reporter: v...@freedesktop.org
QA Contact: mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
CC: chad.vers...@intel.com, emil.l.veli...@gmail.com,
stu_...@126.com, ystree...@gmail.com

mesa: 86ccb2a16f6d21be29cd99d38831eab6079ce107 (master 11.1.0-devel)

$ ./bin/egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl -auto
Unexpected EGL error: EGL_BAD_ATTRIBUTE 0x3004
Expected EGL error: EGL_BAD_MATCH 0x3009
PIGLIT: {"result": "fail" }

11cabc45b7124e51d5ead42db6dceb5a3755266b is the first bad commit
commit 11cabc45b7124e51d5ead42db6dceb5a3755266b
Author: Matthew Waters 
Date:   Mon Sep 14 18:35:45 2015 +0100

egl: rework handling EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS

As of version 15 of the EGL_KHR_create_context spec, debug contexts
are allowed for ES contexts.  We should allow creation instead of
erroring.

While we're here provide a more comprehensive checking for the other two
flags - ROBUST_ACCESS_BIT_KHR and FORWARD_COMPATIBLE_BIT_KHR

v2 [Emil Velikov] Rebase. Minor tweak in commit message.

Cc: Boyan Ding 
Cc: Chad Versace 
Cc: "10.6 11.0" 
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=91044
Signed-off-by: Matthew Waters 
Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov 

:04 04 b134e418a0c11e0fecde8623388be853cddd62c7
217dd9b7d9475918f9ac20a3592bffc399a87319 Msrc
bisect run success

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

Boyan Ding  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ramix.ben.hass...@intel.com

--- Comment #1 from Boyan Ding  ---
*** Bug 92536 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

Boyan Ding  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Component|Mesa core   |EGL

--- Comment #4 from Boyan Ding  ---
(In reply to Matthew Waters from comment #2)
> Created attachment 119006 [details] [review]
> egl: distnguish between unsupported api vs capabilities for EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS
> 
> This fixes that issue for me.

Well, your patch does seem to eliminate the problem, but there is a subtle
difference between how things works now and before, which I think may be
questionable.

The spec of EGL_KHR_create_context says:
requesting a forward-compatible context for OpenGL versions less
than 3.0 will generate an error

The code now takes "OpenGL version" above as version requested with EGL (1.0 by
default). However, the OpenGL version actually provided can be up to 3.0. In
such case, your patch will fail to create forward-compatible context, giving
the "appropriate" error, while mesa before 86ccb2a1 will succeed. Though both
behaviors pass piglit.

Any ideas?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

--- Comment #6 from Emil Velikov  ---
Personally I think that one can interpret the return value in either way -
GL_BAD_ATTRIBUTE or EGL_BAD_MATCH. I'd vote for consistency so I'll check what
the other GL test suites are doing.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

--- Comment #3 from Matthew Waters  ---
Note: I don't have commit access so if this is good, then someone else has to
push ;).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

--- Comment #2 from Matthew Waters  ---
Created attachment 119006
  --> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=119006=edit
egl: distnguish between unsupported api vs capabilities for EGL_CONTEXT_FLAGS

This fixes that issue for me.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

--- Comment #5 from Matthew Waters  ---
(In reply to Boyan Ding from comment #4)
> The spec of EGL_KHR_create_context says:
> requesting a forward-compatible context for OpenGL versions less
> than 3.0 will generate an error
> 
> The code now takes "OpenGL version" above as version requested with EGL (1.0
> by default). However, the OpenGL version actually provided can be up to 3.0.
> In such case, your patch will fail to create forward-compatible context,
> giving the "appropriate" error, while mesa before 86ccb2a1 will succeed.
> Though both behaviors pass piglit.
> 
> Any ideas?

IIRC, when I made that original patch over a year ago, I stole that logic from
the GLX code which does exactly the same thing.

Essentially the problem is whether "OpenGL version" is the requested version in
the EGLConfig or the effective version.  I would argue that it's ultimately
impossible to know the effective version without creating a context so the
"OpenGL version" therefore refers to the requested version in the EGLConfig.

I also wonder about the relevance.  Forward compatible contexts only appeared
in GL >= 3.0 versions so if an application knows about forward-compatible, it
knows that it's GL >= 3.0 only and must at least request a GL >= 3.0 to be able
to use the flag.  Requesting a GL < 3.0 context with forward compatible is a
dangerous game to be playing.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 92552] [softpipe] piglit egl-create-context-valid-flag-forward-compatible-gl regression

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92552

--- Comment #7 from Boyan Ding  ---
(In reply to Matthew Waters from comment #5)
> IIRC, when I made that original patch over a year ago, I stole that logic
> from the GLX code which does exactly the same thing.
> 
> Essentially the problem is whether "OpenGL version" is the requested version
> in the EGLConfig or the effective version.  I would argue that it's
> ultimately impossible to know the effective version without creating a
> context so the "OpenGL version" therefore refers to the requested version in
> the EGLConfig.
> 
> I also wonder about the relevance.  Forward compatible contexts only
> appeared in GL >= 3.0 versions so if an application knows about
> forward-compatible, it knows that it's GL >= 3.0 only and must at least
> request a GL >= 3.0 to be able to use the flag.  Requesting a GL < 3.0
> context with forward compatible is a dangerous game to be playing.

Just checked with the glx code and I think you got the point here.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev