[Mesa-dev] [PATCH] mesa/shader: return correct attribute location for double matrix arrays

2015-12-09 Thread Dave Airlie
From: Dave Airlie If we have a dmat2[4], then dmat2[0] is at 17, dmat2[1] at 19, dmat2[2] at 21 etc. The old code was returning 17,18,19. I think this code is also wrong for float matricies as well. This partly fixes: GL41-CTS.vertex_attrib_64bit.limits_test --- src/mesa/main/shader_query.cpp

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] mesa/shader: return correct attribute location for double matrix arrays

2015-12-09 Thread Timothy Arceri
On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 13:41 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > From: Dave Airlie > > If we have a dmat2[4], then dmat2[0] is at 17, dmat2[1] at 19, > dmat2[2] at 21 etc. The old code was returning 17,18,19. > > I think this code is also wrong for float matricies as well. Would be good to have a piglit

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] mesa/shader: return correct attribute location for double matrix arrays

2015-12-09 Thread Tapani Pälli
On 12/10/2015 05:41 AM, Dave Airlie wrote: From: Dave Airlie If we have a dmat2[4], then dmat2[0] is at 17, dmat2[1] at 19, dmat2[2] at 21 etc. The old code was returning 17,18,19. I think this code is also wrong for float matricies as well. This partly fixes: GL41-CTS.vertex_attrib_64bit.li

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] mesa/shader: return correct attribute location for double matrix arrays

2015-12-10 Thread Dave Airlie
On 10 December 2015 at 14:42, Timothy Arceri wrote: > On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 13:41 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: >> From: Dave Airlie >> >> If we have a dmat2[4], then dmat2[0] is at 17, dmat2[1] at 19, >> dmat2[2] at 21 etc. The old code was returning 17,18,19. >> >> I think this code is also wrong f

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] mesa/shader: return correct attribute location for double matrix arrays

2015-12-10 Thread Dave Airlie
On 10 December 2015 at 16:43, Tapani Pälli wrote: > > On 12/10/2015 05:41 AM, Dave Airlie wrote: >> >> From: Dave Airlie >> >> If we have a dmat2[4], then dmat2[0] is at 17, dmat2[1] at 19, >> dmat2[2] at 21 etc. The old code was returning 17,18,19. >> >> I think this code is also wrong for float