On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Jan Vesely <jan.ves...@rutgers.edu> wrote: > On Wed, 2017-05-31 at 13:33 +0100, Emil Velikov wrote: >> On 29 May 2017 at 16:33, Marek Olšák <mar...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > The "ac" functions could also be forked and put into r600 if people >> > want to preserve the OpenCL support. That would remove the dependency >> > on "ac". >> > > > I thought amdgpu.a was supposed to be shared by both, is there a way to > split off the GCN parts and still have reuse shared code? > I won't hide it, my intention is to rely on shared code as much as > possible and force others to care (same strategy with LLVM, but mesa > does not have a nice regression test suite).
This shared code doesn't change. You won't gain anything by sharing it. And with ROCm OpenCL being out there, the fate of RadeonSI OpenCL is also uncertain and it's definitely unmaintained. > >> Any objections if we defer this to the person working on r600+OpenCL, >> or is that a must for the series? >> I'm slightly worried that a "fix the build" is going into "refactor >> driver X" :-\ > > what's wrong with adding an r600g+opencl on radeonsi dependency? if > it's "not used" enough to be removed, then it should be "not used" > enough to have non-standard dependency. Yeah we can add that dependency. There is technically no production quality OpenCL Mesa driver, so the importance of building OpenCL successfully is kinda moot. Maybe we can just let it be in the current state with all its build bugs. Marek _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
