On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 12:19:28 -0700 Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa.rosenzw...@collabora.com> wrote:
> > > > + /* We set the damage extent to the full resource size but keep > > > > the > > > > + * damage box empty so that the FB content is reloaded by > > > > default. > > > > + */ > > > > > > ....English, please? Francais, s'il te plait? I'm not too familiar with > > > winsys or the extension -- what's the difference between damage extent > > > and damage box? > > > > Yeah, reading the comment again I realize it's not clear at all. The > > damage extent is the quad covering all damage rects (even if they don't > > intersect or only partially intersect). The damage box is actually the > > biggest damage rect (rect1 in the following example): > > > > _______________________ > > | | | > > |__________ | rect 2 | > > | | |_________| > > | rect 1 |______ | > > | |rect3 | | > > |_________|______|_____| > > > > damage extent > > Hmm, ok. > > > > If aligning to 32x32 but not 16x16 works, that's probably masking over a > > > bug somewhere else in the code. > > > > I wish I could come with a better explanation, but I couldn't find > > anything explaining why this alignment is requirement or spot any > > obvious bugs in the code :-/. > > Hmmmm. what was the symptom? The symptom is, black areas around the damage rect when the rendering area (the area you define in mali_payload_fragment) is not 32x32-aligned. If you want to test it, remove the "* 2" in the code and run weston+desktop-shell (the partial_update() logic has been merged earlier today, so you just have to build master) and start a terminal. > Also, maybe try with the commit I pushed to > the `tile-aligned` branch on gitlab.fd.o/alyssa/mesa Will try it. Thanks. > > > Oops, I fear intersection of non-32x32-aligned regions is not safe, it's > > just that I didn't test this case :-). Note that union would not be > > a problem here, because the intersection is applied last (just before > > drawing the wallpaper). That's only true if we assume the intersection > > func aligns things on 32x32 pixels of course (which is not the case > > right now). > > I'm not sure I follow why the intersection of, say, 16x16 aligned > regions (that are not also 32x32 aligned) shouldn't work? I'm not saying it shouldn't work, just saying it doesn't work in practice :P. > 16x16 *is* the > tile size for all intents and purposes here; 32x32 only comes up in > hierarchical tiling which is irrelevant to this code (and in fact, we > can disable hierarchical tiling entirely if I need to make my point even > clearer ;P Just poking fun) As I said, I wish I had a better understanding of the issue, but that's not the case :-(. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
