Your proposition seems reasonable, but it's sad that drivers have to deal with this.
Marek On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 12:32 AM, Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > I was working on the component layouts stuff required for > ARB_enhanced_layouts, and ran into an issue with representing this in > TGSI. > > Right now when we indirectly index into arrays, we include an ArrayID > to indicate which array it is we're indexing into. > > However with component layouts, we might have an array that spans > components 0..2 of positions 0..10, and then another array that spans > component 3 of positions 0..5 and another for component 3 of positions > 6..10. > > I'm thinking that this will make sense to be represented as > > DECL IN[0..10](1).xyz > DECL IN[0..5](2).w > DECL IN[6..10](3).w > > And then accessing something like IN[4].xyzw would be fully legit, > however indirect accesses would have to specify the array id, and only > refer to the components of the declared array. > > Does this sound reasonable to everyone? Is there a better (read: > simpler) way of handling this? > > Cheers, > > -ilia > _______________________________________________ > mesa-dev mailing list > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev