On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 5:34 PM, Matt Turner <matts...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> >> > diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.cpp >> > b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.cpp >> > index af8c087..ea91705 100644 >> > --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.cpp >> > +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.cpp >> > @@ -310,8 +310,8 @@ fs_visitor::VARYING_PULL_CONSTANT_LOAD(const fs_reg >> > &dst, >> > inst->mlen = 1 + dispatch_width / 8; >> > } >> > >> > - vec4_result.reg_offset += (const_offset & 3) * scale; >> > - instructions.push_tail(MOV(dst, vec4_result)); >> > + fs_reg result = offset(vec4_result, (const_offset & 3) * scale); >> > + instructions.push_tail(MOV(dst, result)); >> >> Isn't this going to cause us to copy an fs_reg twice, rather than just >> setting .reg_offset? >> >> I'd like to check the generated code. > > What's your concern there? Just that we're useing more CPU?
Yeah, that we're now potentially copying an fs_reg twice when our purpose is just to set a single integer. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
