On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Chad Versace <chadvers...@chromium.org>
wrote:
> On Wed 22 Mar 2017, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> > Wow... This is an impressive quantity of infastructure just to get the
> > number of bits in a field...
>
> In the initial patch, I hand-wrote macros and functions. And I made
> mistakes. That's when I decided to eliminate the mistakes with
> generation. That's why we have the genxml, after all.
>
> > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Chad Versace <chadvers...@chromium.org>
> > wrote:
>
>
> > > + REGEX = re.compile('^#define (?P<token_name>GEN(?P<gen>[0-
> > > 9]+)_(?P<token_basename>\w*Surface(Q?)Pitch)_bits).*$')
> > >
> >
> > Can we please not use XML to generate a header and then use regex to
> parse
> > the header? Let's just use XML for both.
> >
> > I hate to ask for a rewrite, but you should have seen that coming...
>
> Argh... yes, I knew it was coming. Yes, I knew I shouldn't have. But it
> was SOOOO easy.
>
> Now that I've had time to ponder my sin, I no longer want to maintain
> a giant pile of Python "just to get the number of bits in a field". Let
> me propose an alternative: Keep the Python changes to gen_pack_header.py
> that emits the GEN_*Pitch_bits macros, but hand-write the genX_bits.h
> headers. I think that's good compromise. What do you think?
>
Seems reasonable. You can even do a #define like so:
#define GENX_BITS_DECLARE_LOOKUP(field) \
static inline uint32_t \
field##_bits(const struct gen_device_info *devinfo) \
{ \
switch (devinfo->gen) {
case 4: return devinfo->is_g4x ? GEN4_##field##_bits :
GEN45_##field##_bits;
case 5: return GEN5_##field##_bits;
case 6: return GEN6_##field##_bits;
case 7: return devinfo->is_haswell ? GEN75_##field##_bits :
GEN7_##field##_bits;
case 8: return GEN8_##field##_bits;
case 9: return GEN9_##field##_bits;
}
}
GENX_BITS_DECLARE_LOOKUP(RENDER_SURFACE_STATE_SurfacePitch)
Unfortunately, this won't be able to deal with field renames but I think
the right way to deal with that is to just fix the XML. Also, I didn't
think you actually could include all of the genX_pack headers at the same
time due to name conflicts. Is this not true?
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
