Connor Abbott <cwabbo...@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Eric Anholt <e...@anholt.net> wrote: >> Connor Abbott <cwabbo...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Eric Anholt <e...@anholt.net> wrote: >>>> Connor Abbott <cwabbo...@gmail.com> writes: >>>>> That's not necessarily true - you could want to spill a trivially >>>>> colored register that interferes with a non trivially colored >>>>> register, especially if the spill cost of the non trivially colored >>>>> register is higher than that of the trivially colored register because >>>>> e.g. the non trivially colored register is used in a loop. Especially, >>>>> I ran into trouble with the varying packing tests in piglit which >>>>> after a few rounds of spilling looked something like: >>>> >>>> If it's trivially colorable, then when you're trying to get a >>>> non-conflicting color for a difficult neighbor (an optimistic-coloring >>>> one near the top of the stack that's triggering the need for spilling), >>>> it's out consideration because it's deeper in the stack. >>> >>> Right... so in that case, can't we just ignore everything on the stack >>> below the node that couldn't be colored in ra_select()? >> >> Yep, that's what the code's doing currently. > > No, it's also considering other optimistically colored nodes below the > one that failed on the stack... see patch 3 in v3 of my series, which > changes the code to actually do that.
Oh, I misread you as saying s/couldn't be colored/first couldn't be trivially colored/. It seems like obviously the behavior we want, to me.
pgp8d64_HykYc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
