================
@@ -271,15 +237,29 @@ static void reportErrors(Module &M, DXILResourceMap &DRM,
if (auto RSD = getRootSignature(RSBI, MMI)) {
- llvm::hlsl::rootsig::RootSignatureBindingValidation Validation =
- initRSBindingValidation(*RSD, tripleToVisibility(MMI.ShaderProfile));
-
- reportUnboundRegisters(M, Validation, ResourceClass::CBuffer,
- DRM.cbuffers());
- reportUnboundRegisters(M, Validation, ResourceClass::UAV, DRM.uavs());
- reportUnboundRegisters(M, Validation, ResourceClass::Sampler,
- DRM.samplers());
- reportUnboundRegisters(M, Validation, ResourceClass::SRV, DRM.srvs());
+ hlsl::BindingInfoBuilder Builder;
+ dxbc::ShaderVisibility Visibility = tripleToVisibility(MMI.ShaderProfile);
+ trackRootSigDescBinding(Builder, *RSD, Visibility);
+
+ bool HasOverlap;
+ hlsl::BindingInfo Info = Builder.calculateBindingInfo(HasOverlap);
----------------
inbelic wrote:
We don't seem to use `HasOverlap` after this. Is that expected? Should we be
returning an error if it is true?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/146785
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
