On 09/12/2014 03:48 PM, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
One comment below. Otherwise, both of these look good to me.
Reviewed-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason.ekstr...@intel.com
<mailto:jason.ekstr...@intel.com>>
I haven't applied it and benchmarked it myself, but I don't see anything
that would hurt performance.
--Jason
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Brian Paul <bri...@vmware.com
<mailto:bri...@vmware.com>> wrote:
This reduces gcc -O3 compile time to 1/4 of what it was on my system.
Reduces MSVC release build time too.
---
src/mesa/main/format_utils.c | 1030
++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
1 file changed, 550 insertions(+), 480 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/mesa/main/format_utils.c b/src/mesa/main/format_utils.c
index 240e3bc..29d779a 100644
--- a/src/mesa/main/format_utils.c
+++ b/src/mesa/main/format_utils.c
@@ -352,9 +352,14 @@ swizzle_convert_try_memcpy(void *dst, GLenum
dst_type, int num_dst_channels,
*/
#define SWIZZLE_CONVERT(DST_TYPE, SRC_TYPE, CONV) \
do { \
+ const uint8_t swizzle_x = swizzle[0]; \
+ const uint8_t swizzle_y = swizzle[1]; \
+ const uint8_t swizzle_z = swizzle[2]; \
+ const uint8_t swizzle_w = swizzle[3]; \
Is there a reason you got rid of the "register" qualifiers? I'm not
100% sure they were needed in the first place, but I was wondering if
you had a reason.
It don't make any difference. The .o file is identical with or without
the register qualifier (with gcc at least). We can usually rely on the
optimizer to do the right thing.
-Brian
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
