> - Does it make sense to move to SPIR-V? No, it doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
Marek On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 8:17 PM Abel Bernabeu < abel.berna...@esperantotech.com> wrote: > Hi, > > My name Abel Bernabeu and I currently chair the Graphics and ML Special > Interest Group within RISC-V. > > As part of my work for RISC-V I am currently looking at what is needed for > supporting a graphics product that uses a (potentially extended) RISC-V ISA > for its shading cores. My initial focus has been on analyzing the > functional gap between RISC-V and SPIR-V, assuming that whatever is needed > for a modern graphics accelerator is inevitably present on SPIR-V. > > Now, the thing is that most of the potential adopters on our committee > will likely be interested in using mesa for developing their drivers and > that means using NIR as intermediate representation. Thus, I also need to > consider NIR when looking at the functional gap, doubling the amount of > work during the analysis. > > Why is mesa using NIR as intermediate representation rather than SPIR-V? > It would make my life easier if mesa used SPIR-V rather than NIR for > communicating the front-end and the backends. > > I know it is a lot of work to migrate to SPIR-V, but I am interested in > knowing what is the opinion of the mesa developers: > > - My understanding is that when mesa adopted NIR, there was no SPIR-V. Was > a comparison made after the SPIR-V ratification? > > - Does it make sense to move to SPIR-V? > > - Is it feasible in terms of functionality supported by SPIR-V? > > - Is the cost worth the potential advantage of using a more commonly > adopted standard? > > Thanks in advance for your time and thoughts. > > Regards. >