On Wed Aug 19 14:30:01 2026 +0000, Elizabeth Figura wrote:
@spencer-lunarg I wasn't saying that one was invalid, rather the others which have now been removed from this merge request. It's hard to be sure, without access to the repository anymore, but I believe [1] has or links to the discussion I was thinking of. [1] https://gitlab.khronos.org/Tracker/vk-gl-cts/-/issues/4675 So we did just bring this up in the Working Group today and people agreed that we normally allow "zero"/"null" `vkCmd` calls. For example you can call `vkCmdDispatch(0)` and it is a no-op, so we feel this should be the same as well.
We will be writing CTS and if that comes back and everyone shows they support this, we will remove the validation check and then the original code here will
but it seems to me that what is or not a "spec bug" is more of a philosophical thing
rather the others which have now been removed from this merge request.
I started (another) effort last week to redo the dynamic state (in VVL and the spec) to have the concept of "dynamic", "static", and "ignored" which is more inline with your https://gitlab.khronos.org/Tracker/vk-gl-cts/-/issues/4675 which was around the question of "Do I need to set `vkCmdSet*` if the state is really ignored" while this MR is poking at 2 edge case dynamic state which is setting a "range of attachments", which means unlike others, you can have a "no-op" so you (and others) don't need these `if (count != 0)` wrapped everywhere. -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/11688#note_149278