On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Connor Abbott wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 4:15 AM, Iago Toral Quiroga wrote:
>>> Right now we rely on the code at the bottom of brw_set_dest to set the
>>> correct execution size for anything that does
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 4:15 AM, Iago Toral Quiroga wrote:
>> Right now we rely on the code at the bottom of brw_set_dest to set the
>> correct execution size for anything that does not operate on a full SIMD
>> register (dst.width < BRW_EXE
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 4:15 AM, Iago Toral Quiroga wrote:
> Right now we rely on the code at the bottom of brw_set_dest to set the
> correct execution size for anything that does not operate on a full SIMD
> register (dst.width < BRW_EXECUTE_8). However, this won't work with fp64,
> where opera
Right now we rely on the code at the bottom of brw_set_dest to set the correct
execution size for anything that does not operate on a full SIMD register
(dst.width < BRW_EXECUTE_8). However, this won't work with fp64, where operands
are twice as big and we see instructions with a horizontal widt
