| Summary: | [llvmpipe] piglit depth-tex-compare regression | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Mesa | Reporter: | Vinson Lee <vlee> |
| Component: | Mesa core | Assignee: | mesa-dev |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | mesa-dev |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | medium | CC: | maraeo, nhaehnle, timothy.o.rowley |
| Version: | git | Keywords: | bisected, regression |
| Hardware: | x86-64 (AMD64) | ||
| OS: | Linux (All) | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| i915 platform: | i915 features: | ||
| Bug Depends on: | 103350 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
(In reply to Vinson Lee from comment #0) > commit be3ab867bd444594f9d9e0f8e59d305d15769afd > Author: Marek Olšák <marek.olsak@amd.com> > Date: Mon Oct 2 22:30:55 2017 +0200 > > tgsi: implement tgsi_util_get_inst_usage_mask properly > > All opcodes are handled. > > Reviewed-by: Nicolai Hähnle <nicolai.haehnle@amd.com> Looks buggy indeed - for texture opcodes it tries to subtract the shadow coord from dimension for dim_layer however the value from tgsi_util_get_texture_coord_dim() never includes that in the first place. And therefore dim_layer_shadow (which is used to determine the mask in this case) would be wrong too (just XY instead of XYZ for 2d shadow texture). *** Bug 103350 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 103268 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 103266 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Fixed by 77b8392858815625ee7909cf9e866043dab9d074. |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.
mesa: 77d3d71f23b32550b045b5f74b7a5e6ca54d83c5 (master 17.3.0-devel) $ ./bin/depth-tex-compare -auto Probe color at (23,285) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (79,285) Expected: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (85,285) Expected: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (91,285) Expected: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (129,285) Expected: 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (135,285) Expected: 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (141,285) Expected: 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (23,250) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (79,250) Expected: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (129,250) Expected: 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (23,215) Expected: 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (79,215) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Probe color at (129,215) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 Probe color at (23,180) Expected: 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (79,180) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Probe color at (85,180) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Probe color at (91,180) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Probe color at (129,180) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 Probe color at (135,180) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 Probe color at (141,180) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 Probe color at (85,75) Expected: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (91,75) Expected: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (135,75) Expected: 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (141,75) Expected: 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 Observed: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Probe color at (85,40) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Probe color at (91,40) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 Probe color at (135,40) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 Probe color at (141,40) Expected: 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 Observed: 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 Left to Right: ALPHA, LUMINANCE, INTENSITY Top to Bottom: LESS, LEQUAL, GREATER, GEQUAL, ALWAYS, NEVER, NOTEQUAL, EQUAL PIGLIT: {"result": "fail" } be3ab867bd444594f9d9e0f8e59d305d15769afd is the first bad commit commit be3ab867bd444594f9d9e0f8e59d305d15769afd Author: Marek Olšák <marek.olsak@amd.com> Date: Mon Oct 2 22:30:55 2017 +0200 tgsi: implement tgsi_util_get_inst_usage_mask properly All opcodes are handled. Reviewed-by: Nicolai Hähnle <nicolai.haehnle@amd.com> :040000 040000 d1db49cee47cbe6ea3ac52d46bbf4a612f14d3be 11c3d50751b4c921bec7cf463e8c52d4162af19e M src bisect run success