On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:30 PM, Plamena Manolova <plamena.n.manol...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you for the review Ilia! > > On Fri, 1 Jun 2018 at 23:44, Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Plamena Manolova >> <plamena.n.manol...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > + /* >> > + * If the local work group size is variable we have to use a >> > dispatch >> > + * width of 32 here, since at this point we don't know the actual >> > size of >> > + * the workload. >> > + */ >> > + min_dispatch_width = 32; >> >> Is that a good idea? You are able to specify a different maximum when >> using a variable size (MAX_COMPUTE_VARIABLE_GROUP_INVOCATIONS_ARB) >> s.t. this is 16 (or even 8, although that may be too few for practical >> use) -- that way you would just set the max to 768 or whatever on >> gen8+. > > > That's a good point, MAX_COMPUTE_VARIABLE_GROUP_INVOCATIONS_ARB is the > same on all platforms, so it makes sense to use simd16 instead. Thank you > for noticing that.
Well IIRC gen7/gen7.5 can do something like 1536 invocations with SIMD16, while gen8 are down to 768. Either way, not forcing SIMD32 may be nice -- but that's something for you Intel folk to decide. I just wanted to point out that you could have different max's for "regular" compute (where the min max is 1024) and variable-size groups. -ilia _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev