layers: Move image layout validation helpers from CV

ValidateLayoutVsAttachmentDescription and ValidateLayouts now reside
in the buffer_validation module.

Change-Id: I66ce6ecba882b0e5acb70410ef2b99d32070feb0

1 files changed, 124 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/layers/buffer_validation.cpp b/layers/buffer_validation.cpp
index 8cb0eb5f..3823c21d 100644
--- a/layers/buffer_validation.cpp
+++ b/layers/buffer_validation.cpp
@@ -1661,3 +1661,127 @@ bool ValidateMaskBitsFromLayouts(core_validation::layer_data *device_data, VkCom
     }
     return skip;
 }
+
+// ValidateLayoutVsAttachmentDescription is a general function where we can validate various state associated with the
+// VkAttachmentDescription structs that are used by the sub-passes of a renderpass. Initial check is to make sure that
+// READ_ONLY layout attachments don't have CLEAR as their loadOp.
+bool ValidateLayoutVsAttachmentDescription(const debug_report_data *report_data, const VkImageLayout first_layout,
+    const uint32_t attachment,
+    const VkAttachmentDescription &attachment_description) {
+    bool skip_call = false;
+    // Verify that initial loadOp on READ_ONLY attachments is not CLEAR
+    if (attachment_description.loadOp == VK_ATTACHMENT_LOAD_OP_CLEAR) {
+        if ((first_layout == VK_IMAGE_LAYOUT_DEPTH_STENCIL_READ_ONLY_OPTIMAL) ||
+            (first_layout == VK_IMAGE_LAYOUT_SHADER_READ_ONLY_OPTIMAL)) {
+            skip_call |= log_msg(report_data, VK_DEBUG_REPORT_ERROR_BIT_EXT, VK_DEBUG_REPORT_OBJECT_TYPE_UNKNOWN_EXT,
+                VkDebugReportObjectTypeEXT(0), __LINE__, VALIDATION_ERROR_02351, "DS",
+                "Cannot clear attachment %d with invalid first layout %s. %s", attachment,
+                string_VkImageLayout(first_layout), validation_error_map[VALIDATION_ERROR_02351]);
+        }
+    }
+    return skip_call;
+}
+
+bool ValidateLayouts(core_validation::layer_data *dev_data, VkDevice device, const VkRenderPassCreateInfo *pCreateInfo) {
+    const debug_report_data *report_data = core_validation::GetReportData(dev_data);
+    bool skip = false;
+
+    // Track when we're observing the first use of an attachment
+    std::vector<bool> attach_first_use(pCreateInfo->attachmentCount, true);
+    for (uint32_t i = 0; i < pCreateInfo->subpassCount; ++i) {
+        const VkSubpassDescription &subpass = pCreateInfo->pSubpasses[i];
+        for (uint32_t j = 0; j < subpass.colorAttachmentCount; ++j) {
+            auto attach_index = subpass.pColorAttachments[j].attachment;
+            if (attach_index == VK_ATTACHMENT_UNUSED) continue;
+
+            switch (subpass.pColorAttachments[j].layout) {
+            case VK_IMAGE_LAYOUT_COLOR_ATTACHMENT_OPTIMAL:
+                // This is ideal.
+                break;
+
+            case VK_IMAGE_LAYOUT_GENERAL:
+                // May not be optimal; TODO: reconsider this warning based on other constraints?
+                skip |= log_msg(report_data, VK_DEBUG_REPORT_PERFORMANCE_WARNING_BIT_EXT,
+                    VK_DEBUG_REPORT_OBJECT_TYPE_UNKNOWN_EXT, 0, __LINE__, DRAWSTATE_INVALID_IMAGE_LAYOUT, "DS",
+                    "Layout for color attachment is GENERAL but should be COLOR_ATTACHMENT_OPTIMAL.");
+                break;
+
+            default:
+                skip |= log_msg(report_data, VK_DEBUG_REPORT_ERROR_BIT_EXT, VK_DEBUG_REPORT_OBJECT_TYPE_UNKNOWN_EXT,
+                    0, __LINE__, DRAWSTATE_INVALID_IMAGE_LAYOUT, "DS",
+                    "Layout for color attachment is %s but can only be COLOR_ATTACHMENT_OPTIMAL or GENERAL.",
+                    string_VkImageLayout(subpass.pColorAttachments[j].layout));
+            }
+
+            if (attach_first_use[attach_index]) {
+                skip |= ValidateLayoutVsAttachmentDescription(report_data, subpass.pColorAttachments[j].layout,
+                    attach_index, pCreateInfo->pAttachments[attach_index]);
+            }
+            attach_first_use[attach_index] = false;
+        }
+        if (subpass.pDepthStencilAttachment && subpass.pDepthStencilAttachment->attachment != VK_ATTACHMENT_UNUSED) {
+            switch (subpass.pDepthStencilAttachment->layout) {
+            case VK_IMAGE_LAYOUT_DEPTH_STENCIL_ATTACHMENT_OPTIMAL:
+            case VK_IMAGE_LAYOUT_DEPTH_STENCIL_READ_ONLY_OPTIMAL:
+                // These are ideal.
+                break;
+
+            case VK_IMAGE_LAYOUT_GENERAL:
+                // May not be optimal; TODO: reconsider this warning based on other constraints? GENERAL can be better than
+                // doing
+                // a bunch of transitions.
+                skip |= log_msg(report_data, VK_DEBUG_REPORT_PERFORMANCE_WARNING_BIT_EXT,
+                    VK_DEBUG_REPORT_OBJECT_TYPE_UNKNOWN_EXT, 0, __LINE__, DRAWSTATE_INVALID_IMAGE_LAYOUT, "DS",
+                    "GENERAL layout for depth attachment may not give optimal performance.");
+                break;
+
+            default:
+                // No other layouts are acceptable
+                skip |= log_msg(report_data, VK_DEBUG_REPORT_ERROR_BIT_EXT, VK_DEBUG_REPORT_OBJECT_TYPE_UNKNOWN_EXT,
+                    0, __LINE__, DRAWSTATE_INVALID_IMAGE_LAYOUT, "DS",
+                    "Layout for depth attachment is %s but can only be DEPTH_STENCIL_ATTACHMENT_OPTIMAL, "
+                    "DEPTH_STENCIL_READ_ONLY_OPTIMAL or GENERAL.",
+                    string_VkImageLayout(subpass.pDepthStencilAttachment->layout));
+            }
+
+            auto attach_index = subpass.pDepthStencilAttachment->attachment;
+            if (attach_first_use[attach_index]) {
+                skip |= ValidateLayoutVsAttachmentDescription(report_data, subpass.pDepthStencilAttachment->layout,
+                    attach_index, pCreateInfo->pAttachments[attach_index]);
+            }
+            attach_first_use[attach_index] = false;
+        }
+        for (uint32_t j = 0; j < subpass.inputAttachmentCount; ++j) {
+            auto attach_index = subpass.pInputAttachments[j].attachment;
+            if (attach_index == VK_ATTACHMENT_UNUSED) continue;
+
+            switch (subpass.pInputAttachments[j].layout) {
+            case VK_IMAGE_LAYOUT_DEPTH_STENCIL_READ_ONLY_OPTIMAL:
+            case VK_IMAGE_LAYOUT_SHADER_READ_ONLY_OPTIMAL:
+                // These are ideal.
+                break;
+
+            case VK_IMAGE_LAYOUT_GENERAL:
+                // May not be optimal. TODO: reconsider this warning based on other constraints.
+                skip |= log_msg(report_data, VK_DEBUG_REPORT_PERFORMANCE_WARNING_BIT_EXT,
+                    VK_DEBUG_REPORT_OBJECT_TYPE_UNKNOWN_EXT, 0, __LINE__, DRAWSTATE_INVALID_IMAGE_LAYOUT, "DS",
+                    "Layout for input attachment is GENERAL but should be READ_ONLY_OPTIMAL.");
+                break;
+
+            default:
+                // No other layouts are acceptable
+                skip |= log_msg(report_data, VK_DEBUG_REPORT_ERROR_BIT_EXT, (VkDebugReportObjectTypeEXT)0, 0,
+                    __LINE__, DRAWSTATE_INVALID_IMAGE_LAYOUT, "DS",
+                    "Layout for input attachment is %s but can only be READ_ONLY_OPTIMAL or GENERAL.",
+                    string_VkImageLayout(subpass.pInputAttachments[j].layout));
+            }
+
+            if (attach_first_use[attach_index]) {
+                skip |= ValidateLayoutVsAttachmentDescription(report_data, subpass.pInputAttachments[j].layout,
+                    attach_index, pCreateInfo->pAttachments[attach_index]);
+            }
+            attach_first_use[attach_index] = false;
+        }
+    }
+    return skip;
+}