I checked the Vulkan documentation and these validation errors match the documented "Valid usage", so I would say that they are spec bugs, but it seems to me that what is or not a "spec bug" is more of a philosophical thing.
I had brought it up as a question in the internal Khronos repository, and the consensus was that it was a spec bug. I don't have access to that anymore, though.
The concrete upside of these patches is that we clean the logs a bit, so the validation errors that matter are more evident. But I accept your judgement, shall I remove 2/3 and 3/3 from the MR then?
I'm tempted to take them anyway, but these are only two cases of the same dynamic state problem; there are a lot more. Plus increasing the number of Vulkan calls probably isn't great. It may be better to just supply a debug callback that manually suppresses them. I actually have a patch like that that I can find and send.
Also, there are many other validation errors of this nature that I intended to address later. Should I stop working on this direction?
I wouldn't fix the dynamic state validation errors this way, but any other validation errors seem useful to fix. -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/11688#note_149100