On 2015-05-14 07:06:03, Iago Toral Quiroga wrote: > Because SSBOs are very similar to UBOs the implementation attempts to > reuse the code we already have for UBOs wherever we can. There is a lot > of code in the GLSL compiler to deal with UBOs, so we do not want to > exactly duplicate that. An "is buffer" flag is added if needed when
Isn't UBO uniform buffer object? https://www.opengl.org/registry/specs/ARB/uniform_buffer_object.txt So, maybe 'is uniform' or 'is shared storage' would be better? > reusing UBO data structures so we can tell if a given instance > represents uniforms or buffers. Yeah, I guess 'interface blocks' are what UBO's generalized into. This series leverages the UBO code for SSBO, but I think it would be nice to rename shared data structures to reflect the common interface block name. For example: struct gl_uniform_block => struct gl_iblk_buffer struct gl_shader::UniformBlocks => IblkBuffers lower_ubo_reference => lower_iblk_buffer_reference Regarding sharing gl_shader::UniformBlocks with UBO and SSBOs, is this a good idea? I guess I can't see a problem using the same array for both, but it would be less confusing if we renamed it to a more generic name. I think this series could get stuck in rebase hell unless we all agree beforehand what names make sense. Maybe based on that we should just leave a potential rename until after SSBO lands. Ian, What do you think? -Jordan _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
