Am 28.12.2017 um 02:16 schrieb Alex Deucher:
> On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>> On 23 December 2017 at 17:19, wrote:
>>> From: Roland Scheidegger
>>>
>>> piglit doesn't care, but I'm quite confident that the size actually bound
>>> as range should be reported and not the b
On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
> On 23 December 2017 at 17:19, wrote:
>> From: Roland Scheidegger
>>
>> piglit doesn't care, but I'm quite confident that the size actually bound
>> as range should be reported and not the base size of the resource.
>> Also, the array in the
On 23 December 2017 at 17:19, wrote:
> From: Roland Scheidegger
>
> piglit doesn't care, but I'm quite confident that the size actually bound
> as range should be reported and not the base size of the resource.
> Also, the array in the constant buffer looks overallocated by a factor of 4.
> For
From: Roland Scheidegger
piglit doesn't care, but I'm quite confident that the size actually bound
as range should be reported and not the base size of the resource.
Also, the array in the constant buffer looks overallocated by a factor of 4.
For eg, also decrease the size by another factor of 2
