This sets AR_HANDLE_NORMAL for RS880. I've added RS780 too, because I thought
it was a similar GPU, but I cannot test it.
I don't really know if this fix is correct. All I can say is that either
AR_HANDLE_RV6XX is broken (unlikely, but I cannot test it, because none
of my GPUs use it) or RS880 should really be handled like RV670.
---
src/gallium/drivers/r600/r600_asm.c | 13 ++++++-------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/gallium/drivers/r600/r600_asm.c
b/src/gallium/drivers/r600/r600_asm.c
index f01de41..03ded6c 100644
--- a/src/gallium/drivers/r600/r600_asm.c
+++ b/src/gallium/drivers/r600/r600_asm.c
@@ -256,16 +256,15 @@ static struct r600_bytecode_tex *r600_bytecode_tex(void)
void r600_bytecode_init(struct r600_bytecode *bc, enum chip_class chip_class,
enum radeon_family family)
{
- if ((chip_class == R600) && (family != CHIP_RV670))
+ if ((chip_class == R600) &&
+ (family != CHIP_RV670 && family != CHIP_RS780 && family !=
CHIP_RS880)) {
bc->ar_handling = AR_HANDLE_RV6XX;
- else
- bc->ar_handling = AR_HANDLE_NORMAL;
-
- if ((chip_class == R600) && (family != CHIP_RV670 && family !=
CHIP_RS780 &&
- family != CHIP_RS880))
bc->r6xx_nop_after_rel_dst = 1;
- else
+ } else {
+ bc->ar_handling = AR_HANDLE_NORMAL;
bc->r6xx_nop_after_rel_dst = 0;
+ }
+
LIST_INITHEAD(&bc->cf);
bc->chip_class = chip_class;
}
--
1.7.9.5
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
