On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 10:48:49AM +0100, Samuel Iglesias Gons?lvez wrote:
> Hello,
>
> There is only one patch from this series that has been reviewed (patch
> 1).
>
> Our plans is to start sending patches for adding fp64 support to i965
> driver in the coming weeks but they depend on these patches.
>
> Can someone take a look at them? ;)
>
> Sam
>
>
> On Thu, 2015-12-17 at 14:44 +0100, Samuel Iglesias Gonsálvez wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This patch series is a updated version of the one Iago sent last
> > week [0] that includes patches for gen6 too, as suggested by Jason.
> >
> > We checked the gen9 code paths that work with a horizontal width of 4
> > and we think there won't be any regression on gen9... but we don't
> > have any gen9 machine to run piglit with these patches. Can someone
> > check it?
> >
> > Please read the original cover letter [0] for more information.
> >
> > Sam
> >
> > [0] http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2015-December/1027
> > 46.html
> >
> > Iago Toral Quiroga (5):
> > i965/eu: set correct execution size in brw_NOP
> > i965/fs: set execution size for SEND messages in
> > generate_uniform_pull_constant_load_gen7
Then about the other change. I like it being explicitly set instead of just
inheriting the size from the previous instruction.
@@ -1248,6 +1248,7 @@
fs_generator::generate_uniform_pull_constant_load_gen7(fs_inst *inst,
brw_set_default_compression_control(p, BRW_COMPRESSION_NONE);
brw_set_default_mask_control(p, BRW_MASK_DISABLE);
brw_inst *send = brw_next_insn(p, BRW_OPCODE_SEND);
+ brw_inst_set_exec_size(devinfo, send, dst.width);
But I'm seeing other occurrences of BRW_OPCODE_SEND as well. For example, there
are such instructions generated in generate_urb_read/write() which are not
addressed. Don't we end up there with doubles as well needing the same
treatment?
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
