On 03/12/2013 10:39 PM, Paul Berry wrote:
On 12 March 2013 22:23, Kenneth Graunke <kenn...@whitecape.org <mailto:kenn...@whitecape.org>> wrote:On 03/11/2013 03:51 PM, Paul Berry wrote: This patch updates the bitfields brw_context::wm.input_size___masks, tracker::size_masks, and brw_wm_prog_key::proj_attrib___mask, all of which are indexed by gl_frag_attrib, from 32-bit to 64-bit. This paves the way for supporting geometry shaders, and for merging the gl_frag_attrib and gl_vert_result enums. The combination of these two will require at least 55 bits in the bitfields. --- src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw___context.h | 2 +- src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw___fs.cpp | 7 ++++--- src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw___vs_constval.c | 18 +++++++++--------- src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw___wm.c | 2 +- src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw___wm.h | 2 +- 5 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) Your patch looks good. However, I hate this code, and so seeing your patch inspired me to re-measure whether the optimization is actually still worth doing. Turns out, it isn't: it actually makes performance slightly -worse- in the game it was supposed to help. So I've sent out a series to delete all this. Hopefully, if Eric agrees, we can just throw it out and you can drop this patch. Sorry for the trouble! --Ken Oh, I would be delighted to see this go away. Earlier today I found myself wondering what effect geometry shaders are going to have on this code--it would sure be nice not to have to worry about it.
Yeah, I found myself wondering that tonight as well, and I really didn't want to think about it.
Probably no effect, actually, since it shouldn't ever have any effect when a GLSL vertex shader is active, and that's required to have a geometry shader active. But..."shouldn't". :) I wouldn't be surprised if there were bugs.
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
