Josh Vanderhoof wrote:
>
> Brian Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Have you given any thought to this? In the original Mesa 3.1 beta
> > there was a simple framework for hooking in optimized FP code.
>
> I have the assembly language working with the newest Mesa. I just
> added a new file, x86.c, which defines gl_init_x86_asm_transforms(),
> which replaces the entries in gl_transform_tab and gl_clip_tab that
> have assembly language equivalents with pointers to the asm functions.
Excellent! I didn't know you were that far along. Looking forward
to trying the code.
> It still has some bugs to fix before I commit it.
When you've got your code polished up you should evaluate how
it integrates into Mesa. For example, consider David Miller's
suggestions on how assembly code might be organized in the Mesa
source tree and a modular way to hook it in at compile and run
time. Though, I imagine you might be ahead of me here too. :)
I'd like to make it real easy for the Intel guys to hook in their
optimized PIII code.
> One new thing about the assembly code that may be bad is that it now
> uses m4 macros. As long as a pre-expanded version is included, is
> that OK?
OK, I think. I'm treading lightly here. I'm not sure that the last
thread/flame war regarding assembly language syntax came to a consensus.
-Brian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Paul Avid Technology / Softimage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
