Jason Ekstrand ja...@jlekstrand.net writes:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Francisco Jerez curroje...@riseup.net
wrote:
Instead of relying on the default one. This shouldn't lead to any
functional changes because DEP_RESOLVE_MOV overrides the execution
controls of the instruction anyway.
On Jul 29, 2015 3:12 AM, Francisco Jerez curroje...@riseup.net wrote:
Jason Ekstrand ja...@jlekstrand.net writes:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Francisco Jerez curroje...@riseup.net
wrote:
Instead of relying on the default one. This shouldn't lead to any
functional changes because
Jason Ekstrand ja...@jlekstrand.net writes:
On Jul 29, 2015 3:12 AM, Francisco Jerez curroje...@riseup.net wrote:
Jason Ekstrand ja...@jlekstrand.net writes:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Francisco Jerez curroje...@riseup.net
wrote:
Instead of relying on the default one. This
Instead of relying on the default one. This shouldn't lead to any
functional changes because DEP_RESOLVE_MOV overrides the execution
controls of the instruction anyway.
---
src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.cpp | 11 +++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Francisco Jerez curroje...@riseup.net wrote:
Instead of relying on the default one. This shouldn't lead to any
functional changes because DEP_RESOLVE_MOV overrides the execution
controls of the instruction anyway.
Actually, DEP_RESOLVE_MOV calls half() on the
