On Jul 24, 2015 8:02 AM, "Francisco Jerez" <curroje...@riseup.net> wrote:
>
> Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 7:39 AM, Francisco Jerez <curroje...@riseup.net>
wrote:
> >> Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> writes:
> >>
> >>> On Jul 24, 2015 4:00 AM, "Francisco Jerez" <curroje...@riseup.net>
wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> writes:
> >>>>
> >>>> > Ok, I've looked through this again and convinced myself that it's
> >>>> > *mostly* correct. I am a bit skeptical of the address swizzling
for
> >>>> > Y-major tiling.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I've also included some comments that I'd like to see added
(assuming
> >>>> > they're correct). Sometimes it's easier to write helpful comments
if
> >>>> > the person who is confused does the writing. :-)
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks! This will save me quite some guesswork, I'll add them to the
> >>>> patch.
> >>>>
> >>>> > Also, I'd just like to say that I'm terribly impressed after
reading
> >>>> > through this. You managed to handle an amazing number of cases
> >>>> > without so much as a single if statement or predicated instruction.
> >>>> > My hat's off to you sir.
> >>>> >
> >>>> Hah, I feel flattered. :)
> >>>>
> >>>> > Modulo Y-tiling and comments,
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Reviewed-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason.ekstr...@intel.com>
> >>>> >
> >>>> > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Francisco Jerez <
curroje...@riseup.net>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> >> Define a function to calculate the memory address of the image
> >>>> >> location given by a vector of coordinates. This is required in
cases
> >>>> >> where we need to fall back to untyped surface access, which take
a raw
> >>>> >> memory offset and know nothing about surface coordinates, type
> >>>> >> conversion or memory tiling and swizzling. They are still useful
> >>>> >> because typed surface reads don't support any 64 or 128-bit
formats on
> >>>> >> IVB, and they don't support any 128-bit formats on HSW and BDW.
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> The tiling algorithm is implemented based on a number of
parameters
> >>>> >> which are passed in as uniforms and determine whether the surface
> >>>> >> layout is X-tiled, Y-tiled or untiled. This allows binding
surfaces
> >>>> >> of different tiling layouts to the pipeline without recompiling
the
> >>>> >> program.
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> v2: Drop VEC4 suport.
> >>>> >> v3: Rebase.
> >>>> >> ---
> >>>> >> .../drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_surface_builder.cpp | 108
> >>> +++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>> >> 1 file changed, 108 insertions(+)
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_surface_builder.cpp
> >>> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_surface_builder.cpp
> >>>> >> index 5ee04de..0c879db 100644
> >>>> >> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_surface_builder.cpp
> >>>> >> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_surface_builder.cpp
> >>>> >> @@ -215,4 +215,112 @@ namespace {
> >>>> >> return BRW_PREDICATE_NORMAL;
> >>>> >> }
> >>>> >> }
> >>>> >> +
> >>>> >> + namespace image_coordinates {
> >>>> >> + /**
> >>>> >> + * Calculate the offset in memory of the texel given by \p
> >>> coord.
> >>>> >> + *
> >>>> >> + * This is meant to be used with untyped surface messages
to
> >>> access a
> >>>> >> + * tiled surface, what involves taking into account the
tiling
> >>> and
> >>>> >> + * swizzling modes of the surface manually so it will
hopefully
> >>> not
> >>>> >> + * happen very often.
> >>>> >> + */
> >>>> >> + fs_reg
> >>>> >> + emit_address_calculation(const fs_builder &bld, const
fs_reg
> >>> &image,
> >>>> >> + const fs_reg &coord, unsigned
dims)
> >>>> >> + {
> >>>> >> + const brw_device_info *devinfo = bld.shader->devinfo;
> >>>> >> + const fs_reg off = offset(image, bld,
> >>> BRW_IMAGE_PARAM_OFFSET_OFFSET);
> >>>> >> + const fs_reg stride = offset(image, bld,
> >>> BRW_IMAGE_PARAM_STRIDE_OFFSET);
> >>>> >> + const fs_reg tile = offset(image, bld,
> >>> BRW_IMAGE_PARAM_TILING_OFFSET);
> >>>> >> + const fs_reg swz = offset(image, bld,
> >>> BRW_IMAGE_PARAM_SWIZZLING_OFFSET);
> >>>> >> + const fs_reg addr = bld.vgrf(BRW_REGISTER_TYPE_UD, 2);
> >>>> >> + const fs_reg tmp = bld.vgrf(BRW_REGISTER_TYPE_UD, 2);
> >>>> >> + const fs_reg minor = bld.vgrf(BRW_REGISTER_TYPE_UD, 2);
> >>>> >> + const fs_reg major = bld.vgrf(BRW_REGISTER_TYPE_UD, 2);
> >>>> >> + const fs_reg dst = bld.vgrf(BRW_REGISTER_TYPE_UD);
> >>>> >> +
> >>>> >> + /* Shift the coordinates by the fixed surface offset. */
> >>>> >> + for (unsigned c = 0; c < 2; ++c)
> >>>> >> + bld.ADD(offset(addr, bld, c), offset(off, bld, c),
> >>>> >> + (c < dims ?
> >>>> >> + offset(retype(coord, BRW_REGISTER_TYPE_UD),
bld,
> >>> c) :
> >>>> >> + fs_reg(0)));
> >>>> >> +
> >>>> >> + if (dims > 2) {
> >>>> >> + /* Decompose z into a major (tmp.y) and a minor
(tmp.x)
> >>>> >> + * index.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Please add a comment:
> >>>> > /*
> >>>> > The layout of 3-D textures in memory is sort-of like a tiling
format.
> >>>> > At each miplevel, the slices are arranged in rows of 2^level slices
> >>>> > per row. The slice row is stored in tmp.y and the slice within the
> >>>> > row is stored in tmp.x. The layout of 2-D array textures is much
> >>>> > simpler. Each slice of the texture is storred as a 2-D texture
with
> >>>> > all its miplevels and then one qpitch later, the next slice is
stored
> >>>> > with its miplevels. This code handles both by passing in the
miplevel
> >>>> > as tile[2] for 3-D textures and 0 in tile[2] for 2-D array
textures.
> >>>> > */
> >>>>
> >>>> Note that depending on the ARYSPC_LOD0 surface state flag array
textures
> >>>> may also be interleaved in the opposite way -- All slices for LOD0,
then
> >>>> all slices for LOD1, and so on. We probably don't hit this case
> >>>> currently because MS images are not exposed but it's handled in the
same
> >>>> way by setting stride[3] to the spacing between slices. I'll add
that
> >>>> to your comment.
> >>>>
> >>>> >> + */
> >>>> >> + bld.BFE(offset(tmp, bld, 0), offset(tile, bld, 2),
> >>> fs_reg(0),
> >>>> >> + offset(retype(coord, BRW_REGISTER_TYPE_UD),
bld,
> >>> 2));
> >>>> >> + bld.SHR(offset(tmp, bld, 1),
> >>>> >> + offset(retype(coord, BRW_REGISTER_TYPE_UD),
bld,
> >>> 2),
> >>>> >> + offset(tile, bld, 2));
> >>>> >> +
> >>>> >> + /* Take into account the horizontal (tmp.x) and
vertical
> >>> (tmp.y)
> >>>> >> + * slice offset.
> >>>> >> + */
> >>>> >> + for (unsigned c = 0; c < 2; ++c) {
> >>>> >> + bld.MUL(offset(tmp, bld, c),
> >>>> >> + offset(stride, bld, 2 + c), offset(tmp,
bld,
> >>> c));
> >>>> >> + bld.ADD(offset(addr, bld, c),
> >>>> >> + offset(addr, bld, c), offset(tmp, bld,
c));
> >>>> >> + }
> >>>> >> + }
> >>>> >> +
> >>>> >> + if (dims > 1) {
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Please add as a comment:
> >>>> > /*
> >>>> > Calculate the major/minor x and y indices. In order to accommodate
> >>>> > both X and Y tiling, the Y-major tiling format is treated as being
a
> >>>> > bunch of narrow X-tiles placed next to each other. This means
that
> >>>> > the tile width for Y-tiling is actually the width of one
sub-column of
> >>>> > the Y-major tile where each 4K tile has 8 512B sub-columns.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > The major Y value is the row of tiles in which the pixel lives.
The
> >>>> > major X value is the tile sub-column in which the pixel lives; for
X
> >>>> > tiling, this is the same as the tile column, for Y tiling, each
tile
> >>>> > has 8 sub-columns. The minor X and Y indices are the position
within
> >>>> > the sub-column.
> >>>> > */
> >>>> >> + for (unsigned c = 0; c < 2; ++c) {
> >>>> >> + /* Calculate the minor x and y indices. */
> >>>> >> + bld.BFE(offset(minor, bld, c), offset(tile, bld,
c),
> >>>> >> + fs_reg(0), offset(addr, bld, c));
> >>>> >> +
> >>>> >> + /* Calculate the major x and y indices. */
> >>>> >> + bld.SHR(offset(major, bld, c),
> >>>> >> + offset(addr, bld, c), offset(tile, bld,
c));
> >>>> >> + }
> >>>> >> +
> >>>> >> + /* Calculate the texel index from the start of the
tile
> >>> row and
> >>>> >> + * the vertical coordinate of the row.
> >>>> >> + * Equivalent to:
> >>>> >> + * tmp.x = (major.x << tile.y << tile.x) +
> >>>> >> + * (minor.y << tile.x) + minor.x
> >>>> >> + * tmp.y = major.y << tile.y
> >>>> >> + */
> >>>> >> + bld.SHL(tmp, major, offset(tile, bld, 1));
> >>>> >> + bld.ADD(tmp, tmp, offset(minor, bld, 1));
> >>>> >> + bld.SHL(tmp, tmp, offset(tile, bld, 0));
> >>>> >> + bld.ADD(tmp, tmp, minor);
> >>>> >> + bld.SHL(offset(tmp, bld, 1),
> >>>> >> + offset(major, bld, 1), offset(tile, bld, 1));
> >>>> >> +
> >>>> >> + /* Add it to the start of the tile row. */
> >>>> >> + bld.MUL(offset(tmp, bld, 1),
> >>>> >> + offset(tmp, bld, 1), offset(stride, bld, 1));
> >>>> >> + bld.ADD(tmp, tmp, offset(tmp, bld, 1));
> >>>> >> +
> >>>> >> + /* Multiply by the Bpp value. */
> >>>> >> + bld.MUL(dst, tmp, stride);
> >>>> >> +
> >>>> >> + if (devinfo->gen < 8 && !devinfo->is_baytrail) {
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Talking to Ken a bit about this. It seems as if this is actually
the
> >>>> > check we want. It's going to be a nasty bug if someone has a
shader
> >>>> > cache on a HSW machine, runs some compute shaders, pulls out a
stick
> >>>> > of ram (going from dual to single-channel), and starts it up again.
> >>>> > Probably best to compile the shader the same regardless of how much
> >>>> > ram you have.
> >>>> >
> >>>> Hmm, I guess we could also invalidate the cache if the flag changes?
> >>>> (or in case anything else changes from the brw_device_info structure)
> >>>>
> >>>> >> + /* Take into account the two dynamically specified
> >>> shifts. */
> >>>> >> + for (unsigned c = 0; c < 2; ++c)
> >>>> >> + bld.SHR(offset(tmp, bld, c), dst, offset(swz,
bld,
> >>> c));
> >>>> >> +
> >>>> >> + /* XOR tmp.x and tmp.y with bit 6 of the memory
> >>> address. */
> >>>> >> + bld.XOR(tmp, tmp, offset(tmp, bld, 1));
> >>>> >> + bld.AND(tmp, tmp, fs_reg(1 << 6));
> >>>> >> + bld.XOR(dst, dst, tmp);
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I don't think this is correct for Y-tiled surfaces. In Y-tiling,
bit
> >>>> > 6 of the address is given by bit6 XOR bit9. You have one extra XOR
> >>>> > which means you just get just bit9.
> >>>> >
> >>>> The extra XOR is made a no-op for the Y-tiled case in the same way
that
> >>>> they are both made a no-op in the no-swizzling case. I'll add
another
> >>>> comment clarifying that.
> >>>
> >>> I don't think that actually works. In the zero-shift case, the first
XOR
> >>> produces an all-zero value, you mask to bit 6 (still all-zero) and
XOR with
> >>> the original value and get the original back. In the Y-tiled case,
you
> >>> compute a ^ (a >> 3) and mask off bit 6. This gives you bit6 ^ bit9
in the
> >>> sixth bit and zero everywhere else. When you then XOR that with the
> >>> original, the two copies of bit6 cancel out and you are left with
bit9 only.
> >>>
> >> Not exactly, in either case the result of the swizzling calculation
> >> is:
> >> addr' = addr ^ ((1 << 6) & ((addr >> swz.x) ^ (addr >> swz.y)))
> >>
> >> If the surface is Y-tiled, swz.x = 3 and swz.y = 31, which gives:
> >> addr' = addr ^ ((1 << 6) & ((addr[9] ^ addr[37]) << 6)) =
> >> addr ^ ((addr[9] ^ 0) << 6) = addr ^ (addr[9] << 6)
> >>
> >> I guess I should add another comment here about how the XOR
instructions
> >> are NOP-ed out when they're not needed. :)
> >
> > Right. I'd missed the fact that the default swizzle was not zero.
> > Also, it's 0xff, so it's 255, not 31. I'm not sure what addr >> 255
> > does. Maybe it only takes 5 bits and it's actually 31, but we should
> > probably use 31 rather than 255.
>
> Yeah, I wrote 31 because the actual value used by the hardware is the
> LSBs of the shift value depending on the execution type -- I.e. 5 bits
> for UD. We could definitely initialize the swz parameters to 0x1f as
> well but I used 0xff instead because it would also work for larger
> offset types, e.g. 64bit in which case the hardware shift instruction
> would take the lowest 6 bits -- I'm not planning to extend the code
> above to handle 64-bit offsets anytime soon though.
I don't care too much which we use. However, there should be comments both
here and where we set the defaults saying why the defeault is 31/0xff.
> > --Jason
> >
> >>>> >> + }
> >>>> >> +
> >>>> >> + } else {
> >>>> >> + /* Multiply by the Bpp/stride value. */
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I'm still confused as to how addr can have 2 things while dims ==
1.
> >>>> > Does dims specify the per-slice dimension or total dimension? That
> >>>> > should probably be documented at the top of the function.
> >>>> >
> >>>> dims specifies the dimension of the coord argument. addr may still
have
> >>>> a non-zero y coordinate because it's the sum of coord and the
> >>>> two-dimensional offset value specified by surface set-up. 1D texture
> >>>> slices and levels are laid out in a 2D layout just like the rest, the
> >>>> offset value specifies where in the 2D miptree the requested 1D image
> >>>> starts. You may wonder why we pass a 2D offset to the shader
instead of
> >>>> just fixing up the surface base memory address to point at the right
> >>>> slice at offset (0, 0), the answer is that in the general case (i.e.
not
> >>>> necessarily 1D) it wouldn't work, because a level may start mid-tile
and
> >>>> the result of shifting a tiled surface by less than the tile size is
in
> >>>> general not a well-formed tiled surface -- In the 1D case it could
> >>>> probably be done though because I deliberately disabled tiling for
those
> >>>> (36a17f0f9913), but it would require special-casing them in the
surface
> >>>> state set-up code and another manual calculation of the base memory
> >>>> address of the right slice-level of the miptree.
> >>>>
> >>>> >> + bld.MUL(offset(addr, bld, 1),
> >>>> >> + offset(addr, bld, 1), offset(stride, bld,
1));
> >>>> >> + bld.ADD(addr, addr, offset(addr, bld, 1));
> >>>> >> + bld.MUL(dst, addr, stride);
> >>>> >> + }
> >>>> >> +
> >>>> >> + return dst;
> >>>> >> + }
> >>>> >> + }
> >>>> >> }
> >>>> >> --
> >>>> >> 2.4.3
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> _______________________________________________
> >>>> >> mesa-dev mailing list
> >>>> >> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> >>>> >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
