On Fri, 2010-08-20 at 00:45 -0700, Corbin Simpson wrote: > I can't find the email where we were discussing TGSI sanity. Did we > want to move the sanity checker to galahad?
It only makes sense to move it there if galahad will end up being the only user of it -- I'm not sure we're ready to make that statement yet. But certainly galahad should be invoking it & I'd hope that it can be worked on in its current location? > Also should I be double-checking the documentation around galahad > tests and making the documentation specify some of these caveats? The > docs are currently really loose on specifying things and don't have > any of the SHOULD/MUST/ALLOWED feel of the GL specs, but this might > not be a problem given Gallium's flexibility. I think it's more a function of the relative amounts of put into GL and gallium docs. The first step was to capture the basic thrust of the interface, but if you've got time & inclination to take it a step further, that's fantastic and appreciated as always... Keith _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
