On 4/12/19 5:04 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 3:15 AM Samuel Pitoiset <samuel.pitoi...@gmail.com <mailto:samuel.pitoi...@gmail.com>> wrote:On 4/11/19 3:30 AM, Marek Olšák wrote: > From: Marek Olšák <marek.ol...@amd.com <mailto:marek.ol...@amd.com>> > > --- > src/amd/common/ac_nir_to_llvm.c | 70 +++------------------------------ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 65 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/amd/common/ac_nir_to_llvm.c b/src/amd/common/ac_nir_to_llvm.c > index 3d2f738edec..3abde6e0969 100644 > --- a/src/amd/common/ac_nir_to_llvm.c > +++ b/src/amd/common/ac_nir_to_llvm.c > @@ -2323,92 +2323,32 @@ static int image_type_to_components_count(enum glsl_sampler_dim dim, bool array) > case GLSL_SAMPLER_DIM_SUBPASS: > return 2; > case GLSL_SAMPLER_DIM_SUBPASS_MS: > return 3; > default: > break; > } > return 0; > } > > - > -/* Adjust the sample index according to FMASK. > - * > - * For uncompressed MSAA surfaces, FMASK should return 0x76543210, > - * which is the identity mapping. Each nibble says which physical sample > - * should be fetched to get that sample. > - * > - * For example, 0x11111100 means there are only 2 samples stored and > - * the second sample covers 3/4 of the pixel. When reading samples 0 > - * and 1, return physical sample 0 (determined by the first two 0s > - * in FMASK), otherwise return physical sample 1. > - * > - * The sample index should be adjusted as follows: > - * sample_index = (fmask >> (sample_index * 4)) & 0xF; > - */ > static LLVMValueRef adjust_sample_index_using_fmask(struct ac_llvm_context *ctx, > LLVMValueRef coord_x, LLVMValueRef coord_y, > LLVMValueRef coord_z, > LLVMValueRef sample_index, > LLVMValueRef fmask_desc_ptr) > { > - struct ac_image_args args = {0}; > - LLVMValueRef res; > + unsigned sample_chan = coord_z ? 3 : 2; > + LLVMValueRef addr[4] = {coord_x, coord_y, coord_z}; > + addr[sample_chan] = sample_index; > > - args.coords[0] = coord_x; > - args.coords[1] = coord_y; > - if (coord_z) > - args.coords[2] = coord_z; > - > - args.opcode = ac_image_load; > - args.dim = coord_z ? ac_image_2darray : ac_image_2d; > - args.resource = fmask_desc_ptr; > - args.dmask = 0xf; > - args.attributes = AC_FUNC_ATTR_READNONE; > - > - res = ac_build_image_opcode(ctx, &args); > - > - res = ac_to_integer(ctx, res); > - LLVMValueRef four = LLVMConstInt(ctx->i32, 4, false); > - LLVMValueRef F = LLVMConstInt(ctx->i32, 0xf, false); > - > - LLVMValueRef fmask = LLVMBuildExtractElement(ctx->builder, > - res, > - ctx->i32_0, ""); > - > - LLVMValueRef sample_index4 = > - LLVMBuildMul(ctx->builder, sample_index, four, ""); > - LLVMValueRef shifted_fmask = > - LLVMBuildLShr(ctx->builder, fmask, sample_index4, ""); > - LLVMValueRef final_sample = > - LLVMBuildAnd(ctx->builder, shifted_fmask, F, ""); The only difference is the mask (ie. ac_apply_fmask_to_sample uses 0x7) while this code uses 0xF. Yes. According to the comment in that function, I assume 0x7 is the correct value?Yes, it's for EQAA. Only samples 0-7 can occur with MSAA. If EQAA is used, 0x8 means the color of the sample is unknown, which is mapped to sample 0 by the 0x7 mask.
Reviewed-by: Samuel Pitoiset <samuel.pitoi...@gmail.com>
Marek
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
