On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Brian Paul <bri...@vmware.com> wrote: > > > Looks like nice work, Bryan. > > Just a few minor questions/comments for now: > > 1. The st_fragment/vertex/geometry_program structs now have a glsl_to_tgsi > field. I did a grep, but I couldn't find where that field is assigned. Can > you clue me in? >
It's assigned at the end of the get_mesa_program function in st_glsl_to_tgsi.cpp. > > 2. The above mentioned program structs contains an old Mesa instruction > program AND/OR(?) a GLSL IR. Do both types of representations co-exist > sometimes? Perhaps you could update the comments on those structs to > explain that. > They used to co-exist, because after my first commit, st_glsl_to_tgsi still generated Mesa IR in addition to TGSI. But I removed the Mesa IR generation in "st/mesa: stop generating Mesa IR in st_glsl_to_tgsi", so now it has either one or the other - glsl_to_tgsi_visitor for GLSL shaders, Mesa IR programs for everything else. > > 3. Kind of a follow-on: for glDrawPixels and glBitmap we take the original > program code (in Mesa form) and prepend extra instructions for fetching the > fragment color or doing the fragment kill. Do we always have the Mesa > instructions for this? It seems we don't normally want to generate Mesa > instructions all the time but we still need them sometimes. > No, I didn't realize Mesa did that, and we don't have the Mesa instructions for GLSL programs anymore. I'm not sure what the right way to handle that is. > > 4. At least one commit message is slightly mis-named: changes to the > gallium/util/tgsi/ files were labeled as "softpipe". Not a big deal, but > maybe be more careful about that. > I thought only softpipe used tgsi_exec, but I'll keep in mind to be more careful in the future.
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev