On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Marek Olšák <mar...@gmail.com> wrote: > --- > configure.ac | 5 +++++ > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac > index 8e9f73f..84a75c4 100644 > --- a/configure.ac > +++ b/configure.ac > @@ -1778,6 +1778,11 @@ AC_ARG_ENABLE([gallium-r300], > [build gallium r300 @<:@default=disabled@:>@])], > [enable_gallium_r300="$enableval"], > [enable_gallium_r300=auto]) > +if test "x$enable_gallium_r300" != xno; then > + if test "x$MESA_LLVM" = x0; then > + AC_MSG_ERROR([LLVM is required to build r300g]) > + fi > +fi > if test "x$enable_gallium_r300" = xauto; then > GALLIUM_DRIVERS_DIRS="$GALLIUM_DRIVERS_DIRS r300" > gallium_check_st "radeon/drm" "dri-r300" > -- > 1.7.4.1
How does this affect architectures on which r300g works but don't have LLVM JIT support? See [1]. (I'm assuming that LLVMpipe requires JIT support in LLVM). r300g works on Alpha, SPARC, and probably others that don't have JIT support. I think the purpose of this patch is to simply prevent downstream packagers from screwing up SWTCL users, but on, say, Alpha and SPARC, I don't think SWTCL cards are possible. Does LLVMpipe in addition to r300g do any good for HWTCL cards? Matt [1] http://llvm.org/docs/CodeGenerator.html#targetfeatures _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
