Jose, Your assertions are disabled or something else is. The test binds a framebuffer which has no attachments. You can do that with the default framebuffer, so the FBO completeness rules don't apply here.
There is also GL_ARB_framebuffer_no_attachments, which allows it for FBOs, though Mesa doesn't support it yet. Marek On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Jose Fonseca <[email protected]> wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> On 24.04.2014 03:12, Jose Fonseca wrote: >> > Module: Mesa >> > Branch: master >> > Commit: fd92346c53ed32709c7b56ce58fb9c9bf43ce9a8 >> > URL: >> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/commit/?id%3Dfd92346c53ed32709c7b56ce58fb9c9bf43ce9a8&k=oIvRg1%2BdGAgOoM1BIlLLqw%3D%3D%0A&r=NMr9uy2iTjWVixC0wOcYCWEIYhfo80qKwRgdodpoDzA%3D%0A&m=XOFDALlPDjLntm1Qs4okrzKRXQoXq3jonmJqsdohb6E%3D%0A&s=27ef6f50a2586caf483f351b5e80126e886087d89d0f98c9d777a6e8e80a229e >> > >> > Author: José Fonseca <[email protected]> >> > Date: Thu Apr 3 15:56:46 2014 +0100 >> > >> > mesa/st: Fix pipe_framebuffer_state::height for PIPE_TEXTURE_1D_ARRAY. >> > >> > This prevents buffer overflow w/ llvmpipe when running piglit >> > >> > bin/gl-3.2-layered-rendering-clear-color-all-types 1d_array single_level >> > -fbo -auto >> > >> > v2: Compute the framebuffer size as the minimum size, as pointed out by >> > Brian; compacted code; ran piglit quick test list (with no >> > regressions.) >> >> This commit broke the piglit test drawbuffer-modes for me with radeonsi: >> >> ../../../src/mesa/state_tracker/st_atom_framebuffer.c:153:update_framebuffer_state: >> Assertion `framebuffer->width != (2147483647 * 2U + 1U)' failed. >> Apr 24 16:38:02 kaveri kernel: [26036.258250] traps: >> drawbuffer-mode[6292] trap int3 ip:7f50e6f52526 sp:7ffffcc82640 error:0 >> zsh: trace trap DISPLAY=:1 >> /home/daenzer/src/piglit-git/piglit/bin/drawbuffer-modes -auto >> >> The test was previously passing. > > It passes here with llvmpipe, and I don't have radeonsi machine. > > It really shouldn't happen. The only way this assertion could fail is if the > framebuffer had no color/depth-stencil surfaces. What's the contents of > *framebuffer, and what's the backtrace? > > Anyway, it's easy to workaround it -- the attached patch should avoid it --, > but it's sweeping dirt under the rug. I suspect something else might have > gone bad. > > > Jose > _______________________________________________ > mesa-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev > _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
