Am 2015-09-10 04:00, schrieb Anuj Phogat:
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:19 PM, Ian Romanick
wrote:
On 09/09/2015 04:55 PM, Anuj Phogat wrote:
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Ian Romanick
wrote:
I'm pretty sure our implementation of this extension is
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Ian Romanick wrote:
> From: Ian Romanick
>
> Previously the result of the complicated clamp() expression just dropped
> on the floor: clamp does not modify any of its parameters. Looking at
> the surrounding code,
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:19 PM, Ian Romanick wrote:
> On 09/09/2015 04:55 PM, Anuj Phogat wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Ian Romanick
wrote:
>>> I'm pretty sure our implementation of this extension is complete
>>> rubbish. I have attached
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Ian Romanick wrote:
> I'm pretty sure our implementation of this extension is complete
> rubbish. I have attached an image from the blit-scaled test. This
> result cannot be useful to anyone.
>
Resending it with link to the image in place
On 09/09/2015 04:55 PM, Anuj Phogat wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Ian Romanick wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure our implementation of this extension is complete
>> rubbish. I have attached an image from the blit-scaled test. This
>> result cannot be useful to anyone.
In case it's of any interest, nouveau fails many of the blit-scaled
tests. However nouveau's MS blits are notoriously bad. [I think I know
what's wrong, just don't have the energy to fix it.]
OTOH the NVIDIA driver also fails at every scale factor (for 2x and
8x, passes for 4x).
On Wed, Sep 9,
From: Ian Romanick
Previously the result of the complicated clamp() expression just dropped
on the floor: clamp does not modify any of its parameters. Looking at
the surrounding code, I believe this is supposed to modify the value of
tex_coord.
This change (along with
On 09/09/2015 11:13 AM, Ian Romanick wrote:
> From: Ian Romanick
>
> Previously the result of the complicated clamp() expression just dropped
> on the floor: clamp does not modify any of its parameters. Looking at
> the surrounding code, I believe this is supposed to
I'm pretty sure our implementation of this extension is complete
rubbish. I have attached an image from the blit-scaled test. This
result cannot be useful to anyone.
On 09/09/2015 11:16 AM, Ian Romanick wrote:
> On 09/09/2015 11:13 AM, Ian Romanick wrote:
>> From: Ian Romanick