Due to an influx of spam, we have had to impose restrictions on new accounts. Please see this wiki page for instructions on how to get full permissions. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Admin message
The migration is almost done, at least the rest should happen in the background. There are still a few technical difference between the old cluster and the new ones, and they are summarized in this issue. Please pay attention to the TL:DR at the end of the comment.
ATTENTION: default value of option allow_glsl_extension_directive_midshader overridden by environment.
ERROR: shaders/csgo/fp-1.shader_test failed to compile
ERROR: shaders/piglit/e0638f1c9eca81c574bcd627e60f62282ec8ff75_3.shader_test failed to compile:
0:1(12): error: extension `GL_OES_EGL_image_external' unsupported in fragment shader
ERROR: shaders/piglit/5494a68e2d2804590b505fa3639cba5753f7ad07_3.shader_test failed to compile:
0:1(11): error: syntax error, unexpected NEW_IDENTIFIER, expecting BASIC_TYPE_TOK or STRUCT or VOID_TOK or TYPE_IDENTIFIER
Another shader that has problems (but for both TGSI/NIR)
ERROR: shaders/piglit/a5b6cf610f51fc289f4c30864e2914ddd78bcf68_3.shader_test failed to compile:
0:4(2): error: value of type float cannot be assigned to variable of type vec4
this kind of thing also happens with "real world" shaders so I dont think this is piglit specific, rather that the piglit shaders in question expose a flaw in mesa.
this kind of thing also happens with "real world" shaders so I dont think
this is piglit specific, rather that the piglit shaders in question expose a
flaw in mesa.
That was because the shaders were failing to compile until I fixed Mesa to compile the compat shaders correctly :)
no, there were significantly more piglit shaders failing because gpu_shader5
wasnt available in the context they requested.
The two I fixed still didnt work after that.
I'm not sure what you mean here. Isn't that a piglit issue?
And there is one that still doesnt because it uses some mixture of
instructions that are depreciated in 150 and gpu_shader5
As I said in the gpu_shader5 bug we sometimes allow extensions to work in lower GL versions than the spec specifies. Whether we should be testing it works in via Piglit is questionable since other implementations use piglit for testing, but then again it is Mesas test suite so it's not unreasonable to do so.
well... Mesa implements OpenGl
so OpenGL is the standard.
The version requirements are there for a reason.
As far as piglit is concerned: I havent given it much thought but can it be that you have to explicitly ask it to check whether the shader you want to use for testing actually compiled?
Does that make sense?
The shaders I'm talking about were looking for gpu_shader5 but mesa as of now only enables that in OpenGL 4.0 it should in 3.2 (GLSL 150)
after that they worked fine, doesnt have anything to do with compat shaders
well... Mesa implements OpenGl
so OpenGL is the standard.
The version requirements are there for a reason.
The reason tends to be "only planning on adding to driver that supports version N, don't feel like thinking about earlier versions". In general, we disregard those where they don't make sense.
The shaders I'm talking about were looking for gpu_shader5 but mesa as of
now only enables that in OpenGL 4.0 it should in 3.2 (GLSL 150)
A test that requested a compat GL 3.2 context would likely have similar issues to what you're seeing now with Mesa.
(All that said, ARB_gpu_shader5 should probably not be exposed in a GL context below 3.2 on Mesa -- it could potentially work with lower with ARB_geometry_shader4, but that's not supported in Mesa.)