Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/5] nir: Do opt_algebraic in reverse order.

2016-02-09 Thread Ian Romanick
On 02/08/2016 04:21 PM, Matt Turner wrote: > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Ian Romanick wrote: >> On 02/04/2016 05:47 PM, Matt Turner wrote: >>> Walking the SSA definitions in order means that we consider the smallest >>> algebraic optimizations before larger optimizations. So if a smaller >>> r

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/5] nir: Do opt_algebraic in reverse order.

2016-02-08 Thread Matt Turner
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Ian Romanick wrote: > On 02/04/2016 05:47 PM, Matt Turner wrote: >> Walking the SSA definitions in order means that we consider the smallest >> algebraic optimizations before larger optimizations. So if a smaller >> rule is part of a larger rule, the smaller one wil

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/5] nir: Do opt_algebraic in reverse order.

2016-02-08 Thread Ian Romanick
On 02/04/2016 05:47 PM, Matt Turner wrote: > Walking the SSA definitions in order means that we consider the smallest > algebraic optimizations before larger optimizations. So if a smaller > rule is part of a larger rule, the smaller one will happen first, > preventing the larger one from happening

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/5] nir: Do opt_algebraic in reverse order.

2016-02-08 Thread Matt Turner
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Jason Ekstrand wrote: > Good enough for me. Please add that to the commit message. R-B Thanks, will do. Do you plan to review any of the others in the series? ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/5] nir: Do opt_algebraic in reverse order.

2016-02-08 Thread Jason Ekstrand
On Feb 8, 2016 9:17 AM, "Matt Turner" wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 8:06 AM, Jason Ekstrand wrote: > > > > On Feb 4, 2016 5:45 PM, "Matt Turner" wrote: > >> > >> Walking the SSA definitions in order means that we consider the smallest > >> algebraic optimizations before larger optimizations.

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/5] nir: Do opt_algebraic in reverse order.

2016-02-08 Thread Matt Turner
On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 8:06 AM, Jason Ekstrand wrote: > > On Feb 4, 2016 5:45 PM, "Matt Turner" wrote: >> >> Walking the SSA definitions in order means that we consider the smallest >> algebraic optimizations before larger optimizations. So if a smaller >> rule is part of a larger rule, the small

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/5] nir: Do opt_algebraic in reverse order.

2016-02-07 Thread Matt Turner
On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 6:04 AM, Eduardo Lima Mitev wrote: > On 02/05/2016 02:47 AM, Matt Turner wrote: >> Walking the SSA definitions in order means that we consider the smallest >> algebraic optimizations before larger optimizations. So if a smaller >> rule is part of a larger rule, the smaller o

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/5] nir: Do opt_algebraic in reverse order.

2016-02-07 Thread Jason Ekstrand
On Feb 4, 2016 5:45 PM, "Matt Turner" wrote: > > Walking the SSA definitions in order means that we consider the smallest > algebraic optimizations before larger optimizations. So if a smaller > rule is part of a larger rule, the smaller one will happen first, > preventing the larger one from happ

Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/5] nir: Do opt_algebraic in reverse order.

2016-02-07 Thread Eduardo Lima Mitev
On 02/05/2016 02:47 AM, Matt Turner wrote: > Walking the SSA definitions in order means that we consider the smallest > algebraic optimizations before larger optimizations. So if a smaller > rule is part of a larger rule, the smaller one will happen first, > preventing the larger one from happening

[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 3/5] nir: Do opt_algebraic in reverse order.

2016-02-04 Thread Matt Turner
Walking the SSA definitions in order means that we consider the smallest algebraic optimizations before larger optimizations. So if a smaller rule is part of a larger rule, the smaller one will happen first, preventing the larger one from happening. instructions in affected programs: 32721 -> 3261