On Wed, 2016-09-07 at 18:48 -0700, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> This will be useful later on when we start using reg_offset() on
> fixed
> hardware registers.
> ---
> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_ir_fs.h | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_ir_fs.h
> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_ir_fs.h
> index 2e5c8e5..4ac9baa 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_ir_fs.h
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_ir_fs.h
> @@ -187,7 +187,8 @@ static inline unsigned
> reg_offset(const fs_reg &r)
> {
> return (r.file == VGRF || r.file == IMM ? 0 : r.nr) *
> - (r.file == UNIFORM ? 4 : REG_SIZE) + r.offset;
> + (r.file == UNIFORM ? 4 : REG_SIZE) + r.offset +
> + (r.file == ARF || r.file == FIXED_GRF ? r.subnr : 0);
I guess that for ARF and FIXED_GRF r.offset is expected to be 0, right?
In that case, should we make it more explicit here by adding an assert,
and/or maybe separating the offset calculation for these register types
(so it only uses nr and subnr) from the others?
Iago
> }
>
> /**
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
