Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/3] tgsi: rename the TGSI fragment kill opcodes

2013-07-12 Thread Christoph Bumiller
On 12.07.2013 16:06, Jose Fonseca wrote: > The tradition has been to use "C" suffix for conditional opcodes, instead of > "_IF". That said, I don't feel too strongly either way. > Except the 'C' suffix usually (ok, we only have BREAKC) indicates a single condition value where non-zero means tru

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/3] tgsi: rename the TGSI fragment kill opcodes

2013-07-12 Thread Brian Paul
On 07/12/2013 08:06 AM, Jose Fonseca wrote: The tradition has been to use "C" suffix for conditional opcodes, instead of "_IF". That said, I don't feel too strongly either way. I agree that the current naming is confusing. And I like the fact that the new and old opcodes don't overlap, which

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/3] tgsi: rename the TGSI fragment kill opcodes

2013-07-12 Thread Jose Fonseca
The tradition has been to use "C" suffix for conditional opcodes, instead of "_IF". That said, I don't feel too strongly either way. I agree that the current naming is confusing. And I like the fact that the new and old opcodes don't overlap, which means there is no way we inadvertently get th

[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/3] tgsi: rename the TGSI fragment kill opcodes

2013-07-11 Thread Brian Paul
TGSI_OPCODE_KIL and KILP had confusing names. The former was conditional kill (if any src component < 0). The later was unconditional kill. At one time KILP was supposed to work with NV-style condition codes/predicates but we never had that in TGSI. This patch renames both opcodes: TGSI_OPCODE