Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] mesa: remove struct gl_extensions::ATI_separate_stencil

Ah neat trick. Unless you submit each prim individually I have some doubts about correctness though. But should be enough to pass piglits I suppose... svga also can't do this (it will just report this via debug callback). Roland Am 10.04.2018 um 21:50 schrieb Marek Olšák: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] mesa: remove struct gl_extensions::ATI_separate_stencil

Reviewed-by: Marek Olšák Marek On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:11 PM, Emil Velikov wrote: > From: Emil Velikov > > Virtually every driver that supports ATI_separate_stencil > also supports EXT_stencil_two_side. > > Use the

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] mesa: remove struct gl_extensions::ATI_separate_stencil

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:27 PM, Roland Scheidegger wrote: > Yes, there is indeed plenty hw (all with d3d heritage, d3d10 doesn't > support different ref/masks) which don't actually have full support for > two-sided stencil. > I think all drivers just cheat and fail though

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] mesa: remove struct gl_extensions::ATI_separate_stencil

Yes, there is indeed plenty hw (all with d3d heritage, d3d10 doesn't support different ref/masks) which don't actually have full support for two-sided stencil. I think all drivers just cheat and fail though since they really want to expose GL 2 anyway. So I suppose that's ok, albeit I don't really

[Mesa-dev] [PATCH] mesa: remove struct gl_extensions::ATI_separate_stencil

From: Emil Velikov Virtually every driver that supports ATI_separate_stencil also supports EXT_stencil_two_side. Use the latter boolean for both extension. With that in mind we can drop the explicit true from the drivers and the nasty comment in compute_version().