On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:31 PM Kenneth Graunke <kenn...@whitecape.org> wrote:
> When we first started using genxml, we decided to represent MOCS as an > actual structure, and pack values. However, in many places, it was more > convenient to use a numeric value rather than treating it as a struct, > so we added secondary setters in a bunch of places as well. > > We were not entirely consistent, either. Some places only had one. > Gen6 had both kinds of setters for STATE_BASE_ADDRESS, but newer gens > only had the struct-based setters. The names were sometimes "Constant > Buffer Object Control State" instead of "Memory", making it harder to > find. Many had prefixes like "Vertex Buffer MOCS"...in a vertex buffer > packet...which is a bit redundant. > > On modern hardware, MOCS is simply an index into a table, but we were > still carrying around the structure with an "Index to MOCS Table" field, > in addition to the direct numeric setters. This is clunky - we really > just want a number on new hardware. > This gets a bit sticky because the "Index to MOCS Table" field starts at bit 1 not 0 so the MOCS value in your patch isn't actually the index, it's index * 2. Do we want to "fix" this and make the MOCS value the thing we actually want on gen9+? --Jason
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
