Hi guys, On 15 February 2016 at 10:54, Tapani Pälli <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Daniel Czarnowski <[email protected]> > > Patch provides a 'sane default' for a set pbuffer surface size when Perhaps too cheeky of a question but "who is to determine these 'sane defaults'" ?
If those are OK for one hardware/generation they won't be for another. I believe the whole problem boils down to the fact that we don't do anything in case of EGL_LARGEST_PBUFFER. Looking at GLX - GLX_LARGEST_PBUFFER seems to be in the same boat :-\ Imho one should honour it while creating the surface. Afaics the spec isn't clear if height/width should be ignored when the bool is set (or I missed that hunk), so I'm leaning towards "yes". > EGL_LARGEST_PBUFFER is used by the client. MIN2 macro is moved to > egldefines so that it can be shared. > > Fixes following Piglit test: > egl-create-largest-pbuffer-surface > With the above said, I'm not sure how much sense it makes to have explicit EGL_HEIGHT/WIDTH in the test, alongside EGL_LARGEST_PBUFFER in the mentioned test. In all fairness, fixing this properly might result in a serious (series of) patch(es). Which might be a bit too much for stable ? Better to cross that road as we reach it :-) -Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
