On 04/02/2013 12:48 AM, Vincent Lejeune wrote:
Btw where can I find some more info on stack_size ?
I assumed it should represent the amout of max stacked exec_mask,
but it looks like it is possible to have much more "manually" pushed exec_mask
level
than reported by nstack (iiuc a push count as much as a 1/4 of a loop level).
Yes, different instructions consume different amount of stack space.
There is an explanation in the ISA docs, section "3.6.5 Stack
Allocation", it's basically correct but don't expect it to be precise
regarding the special cases (e.g. in the cayman isa doc comments in the
table 3.6 look like a copy-paste from r600/r700 docs instead of the
cayman-specific comments). I've added the additional info that I have
regarding the special cases for chip generations and my notes as the
comments in the patch (see callstack_update_max_depth function).
Vadim
----- Mail original -----
De�: Vadim Girlin <vadimgir...@gmail.com>
�: Vincent Lejeune <v...@ovi.com>
Cc�: Alex Deucher <alexdeuc...@gmail.com>; "mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org"
<mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>
Envoy� le : Dimanche 31 mars 2013 22h34
Objet�: Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH] r600g: don't reserve more stack space than
required v4
On 04/01/2013 12:00 AM, Vincent Lejeune wrote:
Hi Vadim,
Does this patch work ? (It's still not pushed)
It works for me on evergreen, but I'm not sure about other chip generations.
I wanted to ask somebody to test it, but the problem is that the piglit coverage
for this is not enough (e.g. initial version of this patch had no regressions
with piglit but resulted in artifacts with Heaven). I thought about adding more
control flow tests but haven't written them yet. The same algorithm
seemingly works in my r600-sb branch with other chips, but the test coverage
with that branch is even lower due to the if-conversion that eliminates most of
the conditional control flow.
I usually prefer not to push any patches until I'm sure that they are not
breaking anything. But well, possibly in this case it's easier to simply
push it and wait for the bug reports. I think I'll check if it needs
rebasing and push it in a day or two if there are no objections.
Vadim
I'm working on doing native control flow for llvm and intend to port
your patch on the control flow reservation.
Vincent
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
