On 11 April 2016 at 09:40, Xiang, Haihao <haihao.xi...@intel.com> wrote: > >> Hi Haihao, >> >> On 7 April 2016 at 17:28, Xiang, Haihao <haihao.xi...@intel.com> >> wrote: >> > This fixes the issue mentioned in https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show >> > _bug.cgi?id=94845 on >> > IVB+(except KBL) >> > >> From a quick diff it seems that the post processing shaders/assembly >> is identical between gen7 and gen8, correct ? > > There are a few differences between gen7 and gen8 shaders, so we don't > want to mix up the shaders for gen7 and gen8. > Imho that's not a reason to duplicate 90% of the shaders: from a quick look the diff is the following
- whitespace and/or comments - missing the odd <1> - some strange ones like the following (no particular reason why one cannot use the same for both gens ?) - mac (16) acc0.0<1>:f fBUFFER_U(0, 0)<8;8,1> -0.344f + mac (8) acc0.0<1>:f fBUFFER_U(0, 0)<8;8,1> -0.344f + mac (8) acc1.0<1>:f fBUFFER_U(1, 0)<8;8,1> -0.344f - And the most significant one "Gen7 AVS WA Only for YUV packed surfaces, NV12 and Y-channel only for Planar surfaces." Seems to be an identical (?) hunk copied across 12 files. So one can just factor the last one into a separate file for gen7 (and ones that I might have missed), correct ? After all the beauty of good software design/engineering is the way we rework these to better reuse existing code ;-) > >> Obviously there are a few missing <1> (afaict they do not made any >> difference) and a few missing files for gen8 but everything else is >> just white space. >> As such shouldn't one consolidate things ? Earlier gen do share a >> fair >> bit, and if I have to wild guess I'd say things don't differ that >> much >> between them and gen7+. > > Yes, adding <1> is just for readable. I will remove it from the patch. > Glad to hear. Thanks Emil _______________________________________________ Libva mailing list Libva@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libva
