On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 8:37 PM, Ilia Mirkin <[email protected]> wrote: > This causes an assert failure in mesa and it doesn't seem like this test > is designed for depth/stencil formats. > > Signed-off-by: Ilia Mirkin <[email protected]> > --- > > Ian, I know you're rewriting half these tests... feel free to fold this > into your series if you like. > > tests/spec/arb_direct_state_access/gettextureimage-formats.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/tests/spec/arb_direct_state_access/gettextureimage-formats.c > b/tests/spec/arb_direct_state_access/gettextureimage-formats.c > index e2d637c..ce25205 100644 > --- a/tests/spec/arb_direct_state_access/gettextureimage-formats.c > +++ b/tests/spec/arb_direct_state_access/gettextureimage-formats.c > @@ -462,7 +462,8 @@ supported_format_set(const struct test_desc *set) > set->format == ext_packed_depth_stencil || > set->format == arb_texture_rg_int || > set->format == arb_depth_texture || > - set->format == arb_depth_buffer_float) { > + set->format == arb_depth_buffer_float || > + set->format == arb_texture_stencil8) { > /* > * texture_integer requires a fragment shader, different > * glTexImage calls. Depth/stencil formats not implemented. > -- > 2.3.6 >
I recently got a conflict while rebasing this which reminded me that I still hadn't pushed this... any objections? _______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
