On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:53 AM, wrote:
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27901
>
> --- Comment #18 from Andre Maasikas 2010-06-08 05:53:36
> PDT ---
> dont' have much net this week to review/test:(
> but i'm ok with it if you make last mul conditional on r700 as
> it has -1..1 rang
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:53 AM, wrote:
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27901
>
> --- Comment #18 from Andre Maasikas 2010-06-08
> 05:53:36 PDT ---
> dont' have much net this week to review/test:(
> but i'm ok with it if you make last mul conditional on r700 as
> it has -1..1 rang
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Frieder Ferlemann
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 28.05.2010 00:04, schrieb Conn Clark:
>> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Brian Paul wrote:
>>
>> This code could be written with a faster algorithm requiring just 13
>> operations
>>
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Frieder Ferlemann
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 28.05.2010 00:04, schrieb Conn Clark:
>> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Brian Paul wrote:
>>
>> This code could be written with a faster algorithm requiring ?just 13
>> operations
>>
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Brian Paul wrote:
> Alex Deucher wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
+static inline GLint r600_log2(GLint n)
+{
+ GLint log2 = 0;
+
+ while (n >>= 1)
+ ++log2;
+
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Brian Paul wrote:
> Alex Deucher wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
+static inline GLint r600_log2(GLint n)
+{
+ ? ? ? GLint log2 = 0;
+
+ ? ? ? while (n >>= 1)
+ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ++log2;
+ ? ? ?
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:13 AM, wrote:
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27901
>
> Alain Perrot changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
>
> Attachment #35777|0
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:13 AM, wrote:
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27901
>
> Alain Perrot changed:
>
> ? ? ? ? ? What ? ?|Removed ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? |Added
>
> ?Attachment #35777|0 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:40 PM, wrote:
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27901
>
> --- Comment #8 from Alain Perrot 2010-05-20 17:40:21
> PDT ---
> Created an attachment (id=35777)
> View: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=35777
> Review: https://bugs.freedesktop.or
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:40 PM, wrote:
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27901
>
> --- Comment #8 from Alain Perrot 2010-05-20
> 17:40:21 PDT ---
> Created an attachment (id=35777)
> ?View: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=35777
> ?Review: https://bugs.freedesktop.or
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 3:58 PM, wrote:
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27901
>
> --- Comment #4 from Alain Perrot 2010-05-19 15:58:12
> PDT ---
> (In reply to comment #3)
>> Alain,
>>
>> Okay, The patch I just posted might fix this bug. It doesn't cause any
>> additional errors
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 3:58 PM, wrote:
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27901
>
> --- Comment #4 from Alain Perrot 2010-05-19
> 15:58:12 PDT ---
> (In reply to comment #3)
>> Alain,
>>
>> Okay, The patch I just posted might fix this bug. It doesn't cause any
>> additional errors
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Brian Paul wrote:
> Conn Clark wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Here is a possible fix/hack to get _mesa_remove_extra_moves function
>> in shader/prog_optimize.c usable. As far as I could tell with my
>> testing there was an issue w
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Brian Paul wrote:
> Conn Clark wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Here is a possible fix/hack to get _mesa_remove_extra_moves function
>> in shader/prog_optimize.c usable. As far as I could tell with my
>> testing there was an issue w
Hello,
Here is a possible fix/hack to get _mesa_remove_extra_moves function
in shader/prog_optimize.c usable. As far as I could tell with my
testing there was an issue with this optimizing pass and OPCODE_MUL .
I just added an exception to for this one instruction and made it easy
to add others sh
Hello,
Here is a possible fix/hack to get _mesa_remove_extra_moves function
in shader/prog_optimize.c usable. As far as I could tell with my
testing there was an issue with this optimizing pass and OPCODE_MUL .
I just added an exception to for this one instruction and made it easy
to add others sh
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Conn Clark wrote:
>> Hello everybody,
>>
>> Here is an inlined asm X86-64 COPY_DWORDS macro I wrote in case
>> anybody would like to use it. it could be slightly improved by writi
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Conn Clark wrote:
>> Hello everybody,
>>
>> Here is an inlined asm X86-64 COPY_DWORDS macro I wrote in case
>> anybody would like to use it. it could be slightly improved by writi
Hello everybody,
Here is an inlined asm X86-64 COPY_DWORDS macro I wrote in case
anybody would like to use it. it could be slightly improved by writing
to 16 byte boundaries but its pretty near optimal when writing to
uncached ram.
#ifdef USE_X86_64_ASM
#define COPY_DWORDS( dst, src, nr )
Hello everybody,
Here is an inlined asm X86-64 COPY_DWORDS macro I wrote in case
anybody would like to use it. it could be slightly improved by writing
to 16 byte boundaries but its pretty near optimal when writing to
uncached ram.
#ifdef USE_X86_64_ASM
#define COPY_DWORDS( dst, src, nr )
20 matches
Mail list logo
