i965/miptree: Tighten up finish_mcs_write

Multisample surfaces only have a single miplevel so there's no reason to
be passing the extra parameters around.  It only leads to confusion.

Reviewed-by: Topi Pohjolainen <topi.pohjolainen@intel.com>
This commit is contained in:
Jason Ekstrand
2017-06-23 10:42:30 -07:00
parent 18a69bbc0f
commit 987c09e044
@@ -2079,18 +2079,18 @@ intel_miptree_finish_ccs_write(struct brw_context *brw,
static void
intel_miptree_finish_mcs_write(struct brw_context *brw,
struct intel_mipmap_tree *mt,
uint32_t level, uint32_t layer,
bool written_with_aux)
uint32_t layer,
bool written_with_mcs)
{
switch (intel_miptree_get_aux_state(mt, level, layer)) {
switch (intel_miptree_get_aux_state(mt, 0, layer)) {
case ISL_AUX_STATE_CLEAR:
assert(written_with_aux);
intel_miptree_set_aux_state(brw, mt, level, layer, 1,
assert(written_with_mcs);
intel_miptree_set_aux_state(brw, mt, 0, layer, 1,
ISL_AUX_STATE_COMPRESSED_CLEAR);
break;
case ISL_AUX_STATE_COMPRESSED_CLEAR:
assert(written_with_aux);
assert(written_with_mcs);
break; /* Nothing to do */
case ISL_AUX_STATE_COMPRESSED_NO_CLEAR:
@@ -2288,8 +2288,9 @@ intel_miptree_finish_write(struct brw_context *brw,
return;
if (mt->surf.samples > 1) {
assert(level == 0);
for (uint32_t a = 0; a < num_layers; a++) {
intel_miptree_finish_mcs_write(brw, mt, level, start_layer + a,
intel_miptree_finish_mcs_write(brw, mt, start_layer + a,
written_with_aux);
}
} else {