Luca Barbieri wrote:
> The problem seems to be in st_manager.c:
> if (visual->depth_stencil_format != PIPE_FORMAT_NONE) {
> mode->haveDepthBuffer = GL_TRUE;
> mode->haveStencilBuffer = GL_TRUE;
>
> mode->depthBits =
> util_format_get_component_bits(visual->depth_stencil_format,
> UTIL_FORMAT_COLORSPACE_ZS, 0);
> mode->stencilBits =
> util_format_get_component_bits(visual->depth_stencil_format,
> UTIL_FORMAT_COLORSPACE_ZS, 1);
> }
>
> This sets haveStencilBuffer even for depth-only buffers.
>
> How about fixing this to set haveDepthBuffer and haveStencilBuffer
> only if bits > 0, and later removing haveStencilBuffer,
> haveDepthBuffer and haveAccumBuffer in favor of just testing the *bits
> counterparts?
The haveDepth/Stencil fields come from the original SGI GLX. We
should probably just test the number of bits in Mesa, as you say.
Want to make a patch for that?
> BTW, what if we have a floating-point depth buffer, or, say, a shared
> exponent floating-point color buffer? How do we represent that with
> the visual structure?
Those things came along after the SGI GLX release. They'd have to be
added to __GLcontextModes.
> Shouldn't we be using the actual formats instead of this *bits stuff,
> maybe by having Mesa look at its internal structures instead of a
> GLXVisual-like struct?
yeah, probably. I'd have to study it for a while.
-Brian
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
_______________________________________________
Mesa3d-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa3d-dev
