On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> wrote:
> ---
> src/compiler/nir/nir.h | 11 +++++++++++
> src/compiler/nir/nir_clone.c | 1 +
> src/compiler/nir/nir_print.c | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/src/compiler/nir/nir.h b/src/compiler/nir/nir.h
> index 34f31eb..94b981b 100644
> --- a/src/compiler/nir/nir.h
> +++ b/src/compiler/nir/nir.h
> @@ -671,6 +671,17 @@ extern const nir_op_info nir_op_infos[nir_num_opcodes];
> typedef struct nir_alu_instr {
> nir_instr instr;
> nir_op op;
> +
> + /** Indicates that this ALU instruction generates an exact value
> + *
> + * This is kind-of a mixture of GLSL "precise" and "invariant" and not
"kind of" isn't hyphenated.
> + * really equivalent to either. This indicates that the value generated
> by
> + * this operation is high-precision and any code transformations that
> touch
> + * it must ensure that the resulting value is bit-for-bit identical to the
> + * original.
I think this is a lot of the problem -- we don't seem to have a good
idea of what these keywords mean, concretely.
Precise is more clear to me: don't optimize things in such a way as to
change the result.
Invariant is much less clear to me though. I've read the GLSL spec of
course, but can someone give me an example?
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
