Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> writes: > On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 17:36:40 -0700, Chad Versace > <chad.vers...@linux.intel.com> wrote: >> After commit "intel: Convert to using private depth/stencil buffers", we >> request from DRI2GetBuffersWithFormat only the front left and back left >> buffers. We no longer request depth and stencil buffers. >> >> Assert that in intelAllocateBuffer and remove the related dead code. > >> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_screen.c >> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_screen.c >> index 81953ce..2d46d67 100644 >> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_screen.c >> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_screen.c >> @@ -972,54 +972,6 @@ struct intel_buffer { >> struct intel_region *region; > >> - ok = intel_get_dri_buffer_tiling(intelScreen, attachment, &tiling); > >> + /* The front and back buffers are color buffers, which are X tiled. */ >> intelBuffer->region = intel_region_alloc(intelScreen, >> - tiling, >> - region_cpp, >> - region_width, >> - region_height, >> + I915_TILING_X, >> + format / 8, >> + width, >> + height, >> true); > > I see no reason to bake in the assumption that the buffers are X-tiled. > Presumably Y-tiling will still be advantageous in many circumstances, > basically any surface which is not a candidate for pageflipping?
If there was some reason, it probably won't be based on just the attachment type, so this seems like a good change.
pgpRiYR2s8Sky.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev