Zack Rusin wrote:
> hey,
> 
> i've been playing around with geometry shaders in my spare time and finally 
> got 
> them to a basically working state. "basically working" implies a high 
> likelihood of many bugs, but bugs that i'd like to get fixed for 7.7 or the 
> very latest 7.8. so i'd like to merge arb_geometry_shaders4  as soon as 
> possible to master.
> 
> it's quite a huge diff, weighting at many thousands lines of code (30000+ but 
> that includes the auto-generated api code) because it affects many parts of 
> mesa. fortunately the no-geometry-shader paths should stay exactly the same 
> and so the execution of those should be completely unchanged after the patch 
> lands. the only driver which implements geometry shading right now is the 
> gallium software driver, all other drivers work exactly as they have been 
> working.
> 
> as mentioned geometry shading software support is only implemented in gallium 
> (in the draw module along the vertex shading). while the old mesa paths 
> obviously have the all the infrastructure work done to be able to implement 
> geometry shading, personally i just won't bother with it.
> 
> having said that there's a few bugs that i know about, some of them harder 
> than the others, in particular:
> - support for adjoining primitives is currently busted
> - sampling in the geometry shader probably doesn't work (to be honest i 
> haven't yet tested it, but i doubt that it's working since the textures come 
> in a multi-dimensional array and we don't handle that right yet)
> - we don't switch around primitives in the draw module (that's pretty trivial 
> to fix, meaning that if input to geometry shader is gl_points, but output is 
> gl_triangle_strip we don't actually do that)
> - the linking code in st_program.c and st_atom_shader.c is very fragile. 
> that's not necessarily a bug but that code is getting way too complex.
> - cleanups. i got some debugging output/code left in there.
> 
> in general though none of those should be too difficult to fix, but it'd be a 
> good idea to figure out if we want geometry shaders in 7.7 or 7.8. 
> as always with large patches that touch a lot of the code, keeping up to date 
> with master is becoming a bit of an issue which is why i'd like to have the 
> merge plan nailed down sooner rather than later.

I have no issues with merging this to master whenever you want. 
Sounds like regressions are unlikely, but I'm sure we can fix any that 
might happen.

Nice work!

-Brian


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Mesa3d-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa3d-dev

Reply via email to