On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Timothy Arceri
<timothy.arc...@collabora.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 09:23 -0800, Anuj Phogat wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Timothy Arceri
>> <timothy.arc...@collabora.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 15:38 -0800, Anuj Phogat wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Timothy Arceri
>> > > <timothy.arc...@collabora.com> wrote:
>> > > > On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 10:06 -0800, Anuj Phogat wrote:
>> > > > > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 9:00 PM, Timothy Arceri
>> > > > > <timothy.arc...@collabora.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > This is needed now that we pack these type of varyings when
>> > > > > > they
>> > > > > > have a
>> > > > > > component layout qualifier.
>> > > > > > ---
>> > > > > > src/glsl/linker.cpp | 15 ++++++++-------
>> > > > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > diff --git a/src/glsl/linker.cpp b/src/glsl/linker.cpp
>> > > > > > index 44dd7f0..52a326a 100644
>> > > > > > --- a/src/glsl/linker.cpp
>> > > > > > +++ b/src/glsl/linker.cpp
>> > > > > > @@ -3763,13 +3763,14 @@ build_program_resource_list(struct
>> > > > > > gl_shader_program *shProg)
>> > > > > > if (input_stage == MESA_SHADER_STAGES && output_stage
>> > > > > > == 0)
>> > > > > > return;
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > - /* Program interface needs to expose varyings in case
>> > > > > > of
>> > > > > > SSO.
>> > > > > > */
>> > > > > > - if (shProg->SeparateShader) {
>> > > > > > - if (!add_packed_varyings(shProg, input_stage,
>> > > > > > GL_PROGRAM_INPUT))
>> > > > > > - return;
>> > > > > > - if (!add_packed_varyings(shProg, output_stage,
>> > > > > > GL_PROGRAM_OUTPUT))
>> > > > > > - return;
>> > > > > > - }
>> > > > > > + /* Program interface needs to expose varyings in case
>> > > > > > of
>> > > > > > SSO,
>> > > > > > or in case of
>> > > > > > + * vertex inputs/fragement outputs that are packed
>> > > > > > unsing
>> > > > > > the
>> > > > > > component
>> > > > > > + * layout qualifier.
>> > > > > > + */
>> > > > > > + if (!add_packed_varyings(shProg, input_stage,
>> > > > > > GL_PROGRAM_INPUT))
>> > > > > > + return;
>> > > > > > + if (!add_packed_varyings(shProg, output_stage,
>> > > > > > GL_PROGRAM_OUTPUT))
>> > > > > > + return;
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > if (!add_fragdata_arrays(shProg))
>> > > > > > return;
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > 2.4.3
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > > mesa-dev mailing list
>> > > > > > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
>> > > > > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I will give you my r-b on this if you can help me understand
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > concept of
>> > > > > exposing varyings and how it's utilized during linking.
>> > > >
>> > > > Sure. The inputs and outputs to a program need to be added to
>> > > > the
>> > > > resource list so that they can be queried by
>> > > > ARB_program_interface_query via PROGRAM_INPUT/PROGRAM_OUTPUT.
>> > > Right. Aren't the input/output variables added by
>> > > add_interface_variables() ?
>> > > add_packed_varyings() is used just for SSO with below explanation
>> > > from
>> > > commit : 4e7fd66:
>> > > "Varyings can be considered inputs or outputs of a program only
>> > > when
>> > > SSO is in use. With multi-stage programs, inputs contain only
>> > > inputs
>> > > for first stage and outputs contains outputs of the final
>> > > shader
>> > > stage."
>> > >
>> > > Can you explain why do we need to add packed varyings to the
>> > > resource
>> > > list even with non-SSO?
>> >
>> > That commit message looks incorrect to me. I don't see anything in
>> > the
>> > ARB_program_interface_query spec saying that only SSO programs can
>> > be
>> > queried.
>> Commit message just says varyings are also considered program inputs/
>> outputs in case of SSO. So, add them to to the resource list in
>> addition to
>> the vertex inputs and fragment outputs.
>>
>> I meant to ask why do we need to always add "varyings" to the
>> resource list
>> to support querying vertex inputs and fragment outputs via
>> PROGRAM_INPUT/
>> PROGRAM_OUTPUT? "varyings" are not supposed to be the part of these
>> queries. Correct me if I've misunderstood it.
>
> I don't see any such restriction in the spec:
>
> "* PROGRAM_INPUT corresponds to the set of active input variables
> used by the first shader stage of <program>. If <program> includes
> multiple shader stages, input variables from any shader stage
> other than the first will not be enumerated.
>
> * PROGRAM_OUTPUT corresponds to the set of active output variables
> (section 2.14.11) used by the last shader stage of <program>.
> If <program> includes multiple shader stages, output variables
> from any shader stage other than the last will not be enumerated."
>
I can see the vertex inputs and fragment outputs added to the resource
list to satisfy above quoted queries. I still don't see why varyings should
be added for above queries.
> ...
>
> For the UNIFORM, PROGRAM_INPUT, PROGRAM_OUTPUT, and
> TRANSFORM_FEEDBACK_VARYING interfaces, the active resource list will
> include all active variables for the interface, including any active
> built-in variables."
>
My understanding isn't changed by above quote from the spec. Maybe Ian
will have some comments. Adding him to CC.
>>
>>
>> > In fact without this change one I believe one of the piglit
>> > tests for that spec breaks since we pack all explicit locations
>> > regardless of having a component qualifier in order to deal with
>> > cases
>> > were the default is used (I guess this could be improved with some
>> > sort
>> > of table used to only pack when there are two varyings at the same
>> > location but thats another issue).
>> > This change likely fixes some other use cases that don't have tests
>> > currently.
>> >
>> > I believe the reason for that commit message is that without the
>> > SSO
>> > check the code in that commit broke some non-SSO piglit tests but
>> > this
>> > was because it was adding both the inputs and outputs of the first
>> > and
>> > last stage which I fixed in 0508d9504aa.
>> >
>> >
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > I can add that to the commit message if you think its useful.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > mesa-dev mailing list
>> > > > > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
>> > > > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > mesa-dev mailing list
>> > > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
>> > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> mesa-dev mailing list
>> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
