Iago Toral <ito...@igalia.com> writes:
> 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?It doesn't really matter as far as this function is concerned: If it's zero it won't affect the result of the function, if it's non-zero it will be taken into account correctly. Some other back-end code may break though if a fixed grf register has non-zero offset, but I'd call that code responsible for asserting "offset == 0" if it's unable to deal with it. > 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 > >> } >> >> /**
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
