On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Matt Turner <matts...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> wrote: >> On Sep 23, 2015 12:29, "Alejandro Piñeiro" <apinhe...@igalia.com> wrote: >>> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4_copy_propagation.cpp >>> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4_copy_propagation.cpp >>> index d3f0ddd..400a13a 100644 >>> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4_copy_propagation.cpp >>> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4_copy_propagation.cpp >>> @@ -325,7 +325,8 @@ try_copy_propagate(const struct brw_device_info >>> *devinfo, >>> inst->opcode == SHADER_OPCODE_GEN4_SCRATCH_WRITE) >>> return false; >>> >>> - if (inst->is_3src() && value.file == UNIFORM) >>> + if (inst->is_3src() && value.file == UNIFORM && >>> + >>> !brw_is_single_value_swizzle(brw_compose_swizzle(inst->src[arg].swizzle, >>> value.swizzle))) >> >> This is a case where we probably want to do the check after we've created >> the "final" value. The question that's being asked is "is this final value >> allowed?" > > I think that's what the brw_compose_swizzle() is doing -- combining > the swizzles and then asking if the result is single-valued.
Yes, that is what it's doing. I guess I don't care too much where in the pass we do this check it just makes sense to me to do it later. Either way, Reviewed-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason.ekstr...@intel.com> >> Also, we emitted it before with the is_visitor code. What checks are we >> doing there to make sure we only emitted the uniform directly if it was OK >> to do so? > > Look at vec4_visitor::fix_3src_operand(): > > if (src.file == UNIFORM && brw_is_single_value_swizzle(src.swizzle)) > return src; > > so it was doing the right thing. Right. Makes sense. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
