On 04/25/2018 11:25 AM, Alex Smith wrote:
Any more thoughts on this? Any objections to it going to stable as well
(it fixes bugs, but is quite a large change)?
I will take care of this after running CTS on Polaris/Vega.
Thanks,
Alex
On 19 April 2018 at 09:27, Matthew Nicholls
mailto:mnic
Any more thoughts on this? Any objections to it going to stable as well (it
fixes bugs, but is quite a large change)?
Thanks,
Alex
On 19 April 2018 at 09:27, Matthew Nicholls
wrote:
> On 18/04/18 22:56, Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> On 18 April 2018 at 00:31, Matthew Nicholls
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Previou
On 18/04/18 22:56, Dave Airlie wrote:
On 18 April 2018 at 00:31, Matthew Nicholls
wrote:
Previously before fb077b0728, the LOD parameter was being used in place of the
sample index, which would only copy the first sample to all samples in the
destination image. After that multisample image cop
On 04/18/2018 11:56 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
On 18 April 2018 at 00:31, Matthew Nicholls
wrote:
Previously before fb077b0728, the LOD parameter was being used in place of the
sample index, which would only copy the first sample to all samples in the
destination image. After that multisample ima
On 18 April 2018 at 00:31, Matthew Nicholls
wrote:
> Previously before fb077b0728, the LOD parameter was being used in place of the
> sample index, which would only copy the first sample to all samples in the
> destination image. After that multisample image copies wouldn't copy anything
> from my
Previously before fb077b0728, the LOD parameter was being used in place of the
sample index, which would only copy the first sample to all samples in the
destination image. After that multisample image copies wouldn't copy anything
from my observations.
Fix this properly by copying each sample in
