On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 1:10 PM, Rob Clark <robdcl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I threatened to do this a long time ago.. I probably *should* have done >> it a long time ago when there where many fewer intrinsics. But the >> system of macro/#include magic for dealing with intrinsics is a bit >> annoying, and python has the nice property of optional fxn params, >> making it possible to define new intrinsics while ignoring parameters >> that are not applicable (and naming optional params). And not having to >> specify various array lengths explicitly is nice too. >> >> I think the end result makes it easier to add new intrinsics. >> >> v2: couple small fixes found with a test program to compare the old and >> new tables >> v3: misc comments, don't rely on capture=true for meson.build, get rid >> of system_values table to avoid return value of intrinsic() and >> *mostly* remove side-effects, add autotools build support >> >> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdcl...@gmail.com> >> --- >> So, new scheme is, I think, a reasonable compromise between keeping the >> python "clean" and keeping the intrinsic declarations easy to follow. >> It still has the side-effect that intrinsic() adds to the table, but >> drops the separate system_values table so that intrinsic() doesn't >> return a value. The alternative would require the helper for various >> specialized intrinsic categories to be declared far from where they are >> used, which is, I think, suboptimal. And it keeps intrinsic() and >> various wrappers pretty straightforward, so I don't think this should >> ever pose a problem for refactoring (and certainly less of a problem >> than the previous solution using cpp macros, so regardless of what your >> opinion about the py code, I guess anyone could agree that this is an >> improvement over the current state ;-)) >> >> Also added autotools build support. Sorry scons and android. (Are we >> ready to drop either of these in favor of nir?) > > You mean meson? For Android, no. I don't see that happening anytime > soon. I looked into it some by having a prebuilt target in Android.mk > that calls meson. The problem is getting all the Android build > environment such as include paths out of Android build system and > passed into meson. I don't know how to do that in a way that is not > manual and fragile. > > It looks like you'd just need to do some copy-n-paste of rules for > Android. And you know you can push an 'android/*' branch to trigger an > Android build of mesa? >
no, I didn't realize that.. on the main git tree? BR, -R _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
