Nanley Chery <nanleych...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:17:02PM -0800, Scott D Phillips wrote:
>> Instead of gtt mapping, call out to other map functions (map_map
>> or map_tiled_memcpy) for the depth surface. Removes a place where
>> gtt mapping is used.
>> ---
>> This is a bit icky, perhaps something like mapping z_mt with
>> BRW_MAP_DIRECT_BIT could be cleaner (but in that case the
>> depthstencil mapping and the DIRECT one would fight for the map
>> slot in mt->level[level].slice[slice].map).
>>
>> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_mipmap_tree.c | 48
>> +++++++++++++++++----------
>> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_mipmap_tree.c
>> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_mipmap_tree.c
>> index fa4ae06399..0b9aafe205 100644
>> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_mipmap_tree.c
>> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_mipmap_tree.c
>> @@ -3460,16 +3460,21 @@ intel_miptree_map_depthstencil(struct brw_context
>> *brw,
>> * temporary buffer back out.
>> */
>> if (!(map->mode & GL_MAP_INVALIDATE_RANGE_BIT)) {
>> + struct intel_miptree_map z_mt_map = {
>> + .mode = map->mode & ~GL_MAP_WRITE_BIT, .x = map->x, .y = map->y,
>
> The old paths were simpler in that they constants instead of map->mode.
> Why the change?
The reason is that the map/unmap_tiled_memcpy will do the tiling at both
map and unmap time depending on the mode flags. If we didn't alter the
flags then both map_depthstencil and unmap_depthstencil could do both a
read and a write, doubling the memory traffic needlessly.
>> + .w = map->w, .h = map->h,
>> + };
>> + if (z_mt->surf.tiling == ISL_TILING_LINEAR)
>> + intel_miptree_map_map(brw, z_mt, &z_mt_map, level, slice);
>> + else
>> + intel_miptree_map_tiled_memcpy(brw, z_mt, &z_mt_map, level, slice);
>> + uint32_t *z_map = z_mt_map.ptr;
>> uint32_t *packed_map = map->ptr;
>> uint8_t *s_map = intel_miptree_map_raw(brw, s_mt, GL_MAP_READ_BIT);
>> - uint32_t *z_map = intel_miptree_map_raw(brw, z_mt, GL_MAP_READ_BIT);
>> unsigned int s_image_x, s_image_y;
>> - unsigned int z_image_x, z_image_y;
>>
>> intel_miptree_get_image_offset(s_mt, level, slice,
>> &s_image_x, &s_image_y);
>> - intel_miptree_get_image_offset(z_mt, level, slice,
>> - &z_image_x, &z_image_y);
>>
>> for (uint32_t y = 0; y < map->h; y++) {
>> for (uint32_t x = 0; x < map->w; x++) {
>> @@ -3478,9 +3483,7 @@ intel_miptree_map_depthstencil(struct brw_context *brw,
>> map_x + s_image_x,
>> map_y + s_image_y,
>> brw->has_swizzling);
>> - ptrdiff_t z_offset = ((map_y + z_image_y) *
>> - (z_mt->surf.row_pitch / 4) +
>> - (map_x + z_image_x));
>> + ptrdiff_t z_offset = y * (z_mt_map.stride / 4) + x;
>> uint8_t s = s_map[s_offset];
>> uint32_t z = z_map[z_offset];
>>
>> @@ -3494,12 +3497,15 @@ intel_miptree_map_depthstencil(struct brw_context
>> *brw,
>> }
>>
>> intel_miptree_unmap_raw(s_mt);
>> - intel_miptree_unmap_raw(z_mt);
>> + if (z_mt->surf.tiling == ISL_TILING_LINEAR)
>> + intel_miptree_unmap_map(z_mt);
>> + else
>> + intel_miptree_unmap_tiled_memcpy(brw, z_mt, &z_mt_map, level,
>> slice);
>>
>> DBG("%s: %d,%d %dx%d from z mt %p %d,%d, s mt %p %d,%d = %p/%d\n",
>> __func__,
>> map->x, map->y, map->w, map->h,
>> - z_mt, map->x + z_image_x, map->y + z_image_y,
>> + z_mt, map->x, map->y,
>
> I can see this update and the similar one below leading to confusion for
> a user reading the debug output if they aren't aware of this change. The
> user may map a rectangle that's not at (level,slice) (0,0) and be
> surprised that the second x,y coordinate is unchanged from the first.
> One solution would be to instead print the level and slice for the z mt.
Good idea, I've added that to the patch.
> -Nanley
>
>> s_mt, map->x + s_image_x, map->y + s_image_y,
>> map->ptr, map->stride);
>> } else {
>> @@ -3521,16 +3527,21 @@ intel_miptree_unmap_depthstencil(struct brw_context
>> *brw,
>> bool map_z32f_x24s8 = mt->format == MESA_FORMAT_Z_FLOAT32;
>>
>> if (map->mode & GL_MAP_WRITE_BIT) {
>> + struct intel_miptree_map z_mt_map = {
>> + .mode = map->mode | GL_MAP_INVALIDATE_RANGE_BIT, .x = map->x,
>> + .y = map->y, .w = map->w, .h = map->h,
>> + };
>> + if (z_mt->surf.tiling == ISL_TILING_LINEAR)
>> + intel_miptree_map_map(brw, z_mt, &z_mt_map, level, slice);
>> + else
>> + intel_miptree_map_tiled_memcpy(brw, z_mt, &z_mt_map, level, slice);
>> + uint32_t *z_map = z_mt_map.ptr;
>> uint32_t *packed_map = map->ptr;
>> uint8_t *s_map = intel_miptree_map_raw(brw, s_mt, GL_MAP_WRITE_BIT);
>> - uint32_t *z_map = intel_miptree_map_raw(brw, z_mt, GL_MAP_WRITE_BIT);
>> unsigned int s_image_x, s_image_y;
>> - unsigned int z_image_x, z_image_y;
>>
>> intel_miptree_get_image_offset(s_mt, level, slice,
>> &s_image_x, &s_image_y);
>> - intel_miptree_get_image_offset(z_mt, level, slice,
>> - &z_image_x, &z_image_y);
>>
>> for (uint32_t y = 0; y < map->h; y++) {
>> for (uint32_t x = 0; x < map->w; x++) {
>> @@ -3538,9 +3549,7 @@ intel_miptree_unmap_depthstencil(struct brw_context
>> *brw,
>> x + s_image_x + map->x,
>> y + s_image_y + map->y,
>> brw->has_swizzling);
>> - ptrdiff_t z_offset = ((y + z_image_y + map->y) *
>> - (z_mt->surf.row_pitch / 4) +
>> - (x + z_image_x + map->x));
>> + ptrdiff_t z_offset = y * (z_mt_map.stride / 4) + x;
>>
>> if (map_z32f_x24s8) {
>> z_map[z_offset] = packed_map[(y * map->w + x) * 2 + 0];
>> @@ -3554,13 +3563,16 @@ intel_miptree_unmap_depthstencil(struct brw_context
>> *brw,
>> }
>>
>> intel_miptree_unmap_raw(s_mt);
>> - intel_miptree_unmap_raw(z_mt);
>> + if (z_mt->surf.tiling == ISL_TILING_LINEAR)
>> + intel_miptree_unmap_map(z_mt);
>> + else
>> + intel_miptree_unmap_tiled_memcpy(brw, z_mt, &z_mt_map, level,
>> slice);
>>
>> DBG("%s: %d,%d %dx%d from z mt %p (%s) %d,%d, s mt %p %d,%d =
>> %p/%d\n",
>> __func__,
>> map->x, map->y, map->w, map->h,
>> z_mt, _mesa_get_format_name(z_mt->format),
>> - map->x + z_image_x, map->y + z_image_y,
>> + map->x, map->y,
>> s_mt, map->x + s_image_x, map->y + s_image_y,
>> map->ptr, map->stride);
>> }
>> --
>> 2.14.3
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mesa-dev mailing list
>> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
> _______________________________________________
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
