Nothing wrong with them, really. All the LLVM stuff has caused me to
fall behind on going through Mesa patches, sorry for that. 9-13 are finally
Reviewed-by: Nicolai Hähnle
On 25.02.2018 02:04, Marek Olšák wrote:
So what is wrong with patches 9-13?
We can do cleanups after those.
Marek
On
So what is wrong with patches 9-13?
We can do cleanups after those.
Marek
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 5:17 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
> I don't think that adding "uint32_t userdata_XX[16];" would simplify anything.
>
> The bottom line is, patches 9-13 are prerequisites for VBO descriptors
> in user SGP
I don't think that adding "uint32_t userdata_XX[16];" would simplify anything.
The bottom line is, patches 9-13 are prerequisites for VBO descriptors
in user SGPRs, so they block that optimization as long as they sit on
the mailing list.
Marek
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:51 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
The user SGPRs for blits are kinda a separate thing where the standard
emit paths are disabled. 64-bit pointers are a short-term issue and
will be removed in 2 years (or 1.5 years or when we want to kill off
old LLVM support). VBO descriptors in user SGPRs will require 32-bit
pointers. Next-gen wil
With a small comment on patch 6, patches 1-8:
Reviewed-by: Nicolai Hähnle
for now.
However, I'm unhappy about how complex this is all getting. 32- vs.
64-bit, merged vs. non-merged, monolithic vs. non-monolithic, and then
special user SGPR uses like for blits and soon VBO descriptors, it fee
Hi,
This series has the following effect on user SGPRs:
64-bit pointers:
TCS:14 -> 12
Merged VS-TCS: 24 -> 20
Merged VS-GS: 18 -> 16
Merged TES-GS: 18 -> 14
32-bit pointers:
TCS:10 -> 8
Merged VS-TCS: 16 -> 12
Merged VS-GS: 11 -> 9
Merged TES-GS: 11 -> 6
