On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 01:39:05PM -0700, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> On 03/14/2014 11:40 AM, Pohjolainen, Topi wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 11:48:51PM -0700, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> >> Previously, both move_uniform_array_access_to_pull_constants() and
> >> setup_pull_constants() maintained stack-local arrays with this
> >> information. Storing this information will allow it to be used from
> >> multiple functions, allowing us to split and move code around.
> >>
> >> We'll also eventually want to pass pull constant location information
> >> to the SIMD16 compile. Saving this information will help us do that.
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, the two functions *cannot* share the contents of the
> >> array just yet. remove_dead_constants() renumbers all the UNIFORM
> >> registers to be contiguous starting at zero, so the two functions
> >> talk about uniforms using different names. We can't even remap them,
> >> since move_uniform_array_access_to_pull_constants() deletes UNIFORM
> >> registers that are only accessed with reladdr, so remove_dead_constants
> >> can't even see them.
> >>
> >> This situation will improve in the next few patches.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Kenneth Graunke <kenn...@whitecape.org>
> >> ---
> >> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.cpp | 7 +++++--
> >> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.h | 6 ++++++
> >> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_visitor.cpp | 1 +
> >> 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.cpp
> >> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.cpp
> >> index c24d2f8..8faf401 100644
> >> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.cpp
> >> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.cpp
> >> @@ -1827,7 +1827,7 @@ fs_visitor::remove_dead_constants()
> >> void
> >> fs_visitor::move_uniform_array_access_to_pull_constants()
> >> {
> >> - int pull_constant_loc[uniforms];
> >> + pull_constant_loc = ralloc_array(mem_ctx, int, uniforms);
> >>
> >> for (unsigned int i = 0; i < uniforms; i++) {
> >> pull_constant_loc[i] = -1;
> >> @@ -1884,6 +1884,9 @@
> >> fs_visitor::move_uniform_array_access_to_pull_constants()
> >> }
> >> }
> >> invalidate_live_intervals();
> >
> > I'm confused. I wondered what was the reason for patch number four removing
> > this call. But this is not present in current master and the first patch
> > does
> > not introduce it either. Leftover from somewhere else, perhaps?
>
> Sorry, I sent out a few patches separately, and one of them added this
> call. I've pushed those to master now.
I just checked, and now I even recall reading that patch in the list. My
mistake.
>
> Patch 4 actually just moves the call into demote_pull_constants() - it
> still happens at the same time.
>
True, I missed that as I was looking for explicit
"+ invalidate_live_intervals();" in the patch.
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
