On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 4:11 AM, Iago Toral Quiroga <ito...@igalia.com> wrote: > Right now some opcodes that only use constant surface indexing mark them as > used in the generator while others do it in the visitor. When the opcode can > handle both direct and indirect surface indexing then some opcodes handle > only the constant part in the generator and leave the indirect case to the > caller. It is all very inconsistent and leads to confusion, since one has to > go and look into the generator code in each case to check if it marks surfaces > as used or not, and in which cases. > > when I was working on SSBOs I was tempted to try and fix this but then I > forgot. Jordan bumped into this recently too when comparing visitor > code paths for similar opcodes (ubos and ssbos) that need to handle this > differently because they use different generator opcodes. > > Since the generator opcodes never handle marking of indirect surfaces, just > leave surface marking to the caller completely, since callers always have > all the information needed for this. It also makes things more consistent > and clear for everyone: marking surfaces as used is always on the side > of the visitor, never the generator.
What happens if we dead code eliminate the last texture() on a given surface? Before in the constant indexed case, we wouldn't mark the surface as used, but since this series moves that to the NIR -> backend IR translation, presumably it'll still be marked used? Is that important, and if so is there anything we can do to "unmark" the unused surface? _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
