Antía Puentes writes:
> On lun, 2015-10-12 at 15:55 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> Antía Puentes writes:
>> > On dom, 2015-10-11 at 10:35 -0700, Matt Turner wrote:
>> >> I would expect big improvements in the vec4 backend from making its
>> >> copy propagation pass global.
>> >
>> > I will be
On lun, 2015-10-12 at 15:55 +0300, Francisco Jerez wrote:
> Antía Puentes writes:
> > On dom, 2015-10-11 at 10:35 -0700, Matt Turner wrote:
> >> I would expect big improvements in the vec4 backend from making its
> >> copy propagation pass global.
> >
> > I will be working on global copy propagati
Antía Puentes writes:
> Hi Matt,
>
> thanks for your suggestions.
>
> On dom, 2015-10-11 at 10:35 -0700, Matt Turner wrote:
>> I don't believe it's valuable to port the opt_peephole_sel() pass to
>> the vec4 backend. With NIR (since NIR essentially performs the same
>> optimization), the opt_peep
Hi Matt,
thanks for your suggestions.
On dom, 2015-10-11 at 10:35 -0700, Matt Turner wrote:
> I don't believe it's valuable to port the opt_peephole_sel() pass to
> the vec4 backend. With NIR (since NIR essentially performs the same
> optimization), the opt_peephole_sel() pass only improves code
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Antía Puentes wrote:
> As there are quite a lot of movement related to vec4 optimizations and I
> would like to avoid overlapping, I am commenting here that I intend to
> work on a version of the fs_visitor::opt_peephole_sel() for vec4.
>
> Suggestions about other
As there are quite a lot of movement related to vec4 optimizations and I
would like to avoid overlapping, I am commenting here that I intend to
work on a version of the fs_visitor::opt_peephole_sel() for vec4.
Suggestions about other FS optimizations worth porting to the vec4
backend are welcome.
