On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 01:53:41PM -0700, Jordan Justen wrote:
> Rather than pointing the surface_state directly at a single
> sub-image of the texture for rendering, we now point the
> surface_state at the top level of the texture, and configure
> the surface_state as needed based on this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.jus...@intel.com>
> ---
> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_defines.h | 2 +
> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/gen6_surface_state.c | 71
> +++++++++++++-------------
> 2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_defines.h
> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_defines.h
> index c38e447..d010d61 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_defines.h
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_defines.h
> @@ -548,6 +548,8 @@
> /* Surface state DW4 */
> #define BRW_SURFACE_MIN_LOD_SHIFT 28
> #define BRW_SURFACE_MIN_LOD_MASK INTEL_MASK(31, 28)
> +#define BRW_SURFACE_MIN_ARRAY_ELEMENT_SHIFT 17
> +#define BRW_SURFACE_RENDER_TARGET_VIEW_EXTENT_SHIFT 8
If you introdeced the corresponding masks you could use SET_FIELD() later on.
> #define BRW_SURFACE_MULTISAMPLECOUNT_1 (0 << 4)
> #define BRW_SURFACE_MULTISAMPLECOUNT_4 (2 << 4)
> #define GEN7_SURFACE_MULTISAMPLECOUNT_1 (0 << 3)
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/gen6_surface_state.c
> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/gen6_surface_state.c
> index 9fec372..728488a 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/gen6_surface_state.c
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/gen6_surface_state.c
> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
> #include "main/blend.h"
> #include "main/mtypes.h"
> #include "main/samplerobj.h"
> +#include "main/texformat.h"
> #include "program/prog_parameter.h"
>
> #include "intel_mipmap_tree.h"
> @@ -54,30 +55,18 @@ gen6_update_renderbuffer_surface(struct brw_context *brw,
> struct intel_renderbuffer *irb = intel_renderbuffer(rb);
> struct intel_mipmap_tree *mt = irb->mt;
> uint32_t *surf;
> - uint32_t tile_x, tile_y;
> uint32_t format = 0;
> /* _NEW_BUFFERS */
> mesa_format rb_format = _mesa_get_render_format(ctx,
> intel_rb_format(irb));
> + uint32_t surftype;
> + int depth = MAX2(rb->Depth, 1);
> + int min_array_element;
> + }
> + GLenum gl_target = rb->TexImage ?
> + rb->TexImage->TexObject->Target : GL_TEXTURE_2D;
> +
> uint32_t surf_index =
> brw->wm.prog_data->binding_table.render_target_start + unit;
>
> - assert(!layered);
> -
> - if (rb->TexImage && !brw->has_surface_tile_offset) {
> - intel_renderbuffer_get_tile_offsets(irb, &tile_x, &tile_y);
> -
> - if (tile_x != 0 || tile_y != 0) {
> - /* Original gen4 hardware couldn't draw to a non-tile-aligned
> - * destination in a miptree unless you actually setup your renderbuffer
> - * as a miptree and used the fragile lod/array_index/etc. controls to
> - * select the image. So, instead, we just make a new single-level
> - * miptree and render into that.
> - */
> - intel_renderbuffer_move_to_temp(brw, irb, false);
> - mt = irb->mt;
> - }
> - }
> -
> intel_miptree_used_for_rendering(irb->mt);
>
> surf = brw_state_batch(brw, AUB_TRACE_SURFACE_STATE, 6 * 4, 32,
> @@ -89,30 +78,42 @@ gen6_update_renderbuffer_surface(struct brw_context *brw,
> __FUNCTION__, _mesa_get_format_name(rb_format));
> }
>
> - surf[0] = (BRW_SURFACE_2D << BRW_SURFACE_TYPE_SHIFT |
> - format << BRW_SURFACE_FORMAT_SHIFT);
> + switch (gl_target) {
> + case GL_TEXTURE_CUBE_MAP_ARRAY:
> + case GL_TEXTURE_CUBE_MAP:
> + surftype = BRW_SURFACE_2D;
> + depth *= 6;
> + break;
> + default:
> + surftype = translate_tex_target(gl_target);
> + break;
> + }
Now we have this switch statement three times (gen6, gen7, gen8). I wouldn't
mind having an inline for it in brw_state.h - though it maybe just me. There
is quite a bit a duplication in the surface_state files anyway, and this
wouldn't make a great difference.
> +
> + if (layered) {
> + min_array_element = 0;
> + } else {
> + min_array_element = irb->mt_layer;
> + }
This could be simply in the declaration:
const int min_array_element = layered ? 0 : irb->mt_layer;
In gen7 equivalent the 'layered' argument is ignored and we simply always honor
the renderbuffer settings (irb->mt_layer). This is now different, and in fact
I wonder the purpose of the layered-argument in the first place.
> +
> + surf[0] = (surftype << BRW_SURFACE_TYPE_SHIFT |
> + format << BRW_SURFACE_FORMAT_SHIFT);
I think it would be clearer to start using the SET_FIELD() here and in the
rest of the file.
surf[0] = SET_FIELD(surftype, BRW_SURFACE_TYPE) |
SET_FIELD(format, BRW_SURFACE_FORMAT);
>
> /* reloc */
> - surf[1] = (intel_renderbuffer_get_tile_offsets(irb, &tile_x, &tile_y) +
> - mt->bo->offset64);
> + surf[1] = mt->bo->offset64;
>
> - surf[2] = ((rb->Width - 1) << BRW_SURFACE_WIDTH_SHIFT |
> - (rb->Height - 1) << BRW_SURFACE_HEIGHT_SHIFT);
> + surf[2] = ((irb->mt->logical_width0 - 1) << BRW_SURFACE_WIDTH_SHIFT |
> + (irb->mt->logical_height0 - 1) << BRW_SURFACE_HEIGHT_SHIFT |
> + ((irb->mt_level - irb->mt->first_level)) <<
> BRW_SURFACE_LOD_SHIFT);
>
> surf[3] = (brw_get_surface_tiling_bits(mt->tiling) |
> + depth << BRW_SURFACE_DEPTH_SHIFT |
> (mt->pitch - 1) << BRW_SURFACE_PITCH_SHIFT);
>
> - surf[4] = brw_get_surface_num_multisamples(mt->num_samples);
> -
> - assert(brw->has_surface_tile_offset || (tile_x == 0 && tile_y == 0));
> - /* Note that the low bits of these fields are missing, so
> - * there's the possibility of getting in trouble.
> - */
> - assert(tile_x % 4 == 0);
> - assert(tile_y % 2 == 0);
> - surf[5] = ((tile_x / 4) << BRW_SURFACE_X_OFFSET_SHIFT |
> - (tile_y / 2) << BRW_SURFACE_Y_OFFSET_SHIFT |
> - (mt->align_h == 4 ? BRW_SURFACE_VERTICAL_ALIGN_ENABLE : 0));
> + surf[4] = brw_get_surface_num_multisamples(mt->num_samples) |
> + min_array_element << BRW_SURFACE_MIN_ARRAY_ELEMENT_SHIFT |
> + depth << BRW_SURFACE_RENDER_TARGET_VIEW_EXTENT_SHIFT;
> +
> + surf[5] = (mt->align_h == 4 ? BRW_SURFACE_VERTICAL_ALIGN_ENABLE : 0);
You can drop the parentheses;
>
> if (brw->gen < 6) {
> /* _NEW_COLOR */
> --
> 2.0.0.rc4
>
> _______________________________________________
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
