On Wednesday, May 13, 2015 07:33:22 PM Francisco Jerez wrote: > - Nothing prevents you from "evaluating" the builder framework > independent from the tiling and format conversion code. [snip]
I think you misunderstand - we all largely agree that the fs_builder infrastructure is a good idea. I think we've mostly evaluated it and concluded that it's worth doing. But the array_utils stuff - a new subclass of backend_reg - emit_collect, emit_extract, emit_zip, emit_send, all of that is a bunch of new infrastructure that's only used in your new code, and is hard to evaluate. > That's not nearly what I meant. Of course whether and how we carry out > the transition will still be open for discussion, that statement you > quote was intended to show that I'm willing to do the hard work and not > going to abandon the new infrastructure while the transition is half-way > done (as Ken rudely insinuated on IRC). That's good news. In the past, many instances of "we'll fix it later" have turned into "we never got around to it" - not from you, but from other developers. We've also been fixing bugs with subreg_offset for about a year now...which was added for ARB_image_load_store (IIRC)... and not accounted for in a lot of places (i.e. dead code elimination thought writing g7.2 kills a previous write to any of g7). So it's a real concern, no matter who's writing the code.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev