On 15 November 2011 14:52, Jose Fonseca <jfons...@vmware.com> wrote: > Developer time is important too. And having more code paths shared with other > drivers (even at the expense of a few extra CPU cycles every time a shader is > created) means that developers has more time to focus on features that can > yield substantial improvements on true hotspots (e.g., every time a pixel is > rendered). > > This particular case may not be the best example. But there is a trade off: > more specialization means more maintenance burden. > I certainly agree with the general principle, though I think that you should take the driver specific IR into account in that consideration. I.e., I'm not sure that in terms of divergence of the generated code you really gain a lot with undoing elimination of output reads in the driver IR compared to not eliminating them in the first place for some drivers.
On the other hand, I think it's certainly conceivable that if r600g had a proper hardware specific optimizer it would end up eliminating the code in question anyway as a side effect. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
