2011/3/9 Christian König <deathsim...@vodafone.de>: > So please take a look at the attached patch, it shouldn't change the > generated bytecode a bit, but just makes the code more readable (at > least I think so) and easier to extend. > The general approach makes sense to me. Having flags may be nicer than having separate bools for the instruction info table though. The instruction info and chiprev info tables are separate changes, of course. I'm not sure about exposing the tables themselves directly. Related to that is that I think r600_bc_init() may not be the right place for that switch, it seems like the kind of thing you want to initialize during context, or perhaps even winsys creation. The OP2/OP3 distinction isn't very nice, we could probably get rid of that by introducing extra indirection (i.e., R600_INST_* and then only map to actual instructions during the final stage of translation), but I don't think it's worth it.
> + if(alu->is_op3) Most of r600g has a space between control statements and the brace. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
