On 11.01.2018 12:22, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 3:51 AM, Gert Wollny wrote:
Am Donnerstag, den 11.01.2018, 08:09 +0100 schrieb Gert Wollny:
Am Mittwoch, den 10.01.2018, 15:27 -0500 schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
[...]
If your hardware executes all the vertices in
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 3:51 AM, Gert Wollny wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 11.01.2018, 08:09 +0100 schrieb Gert Wollny:
>> Am Mittwoch, den 10.01.2018, 15:27 -0500 schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
>> [...]
>> >
>> > If your hardware executes all the vertices in parallel, then a
>> >
Am Donnerstag, den 11.01.2018, 08:09 +0100 schrieb Gert Wollny:
> Am Mittwoch, den 10.01.2018, 15:27 -0500 schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
> [...]
> >
> > If your hardware executes all the vertices in parallel, then a
> > barrier should be unnecessary.
>
> My first try for this patch did not include
Am Donnerstag, den 11.01.2018, 08:18 +1000 schrieb Dave Airlie:
>
> > The number of writes is the same though, and as far as I can tell
> > from the TGSI, the values written to LDS before the barrier are not
> > read back within the shader - which makes me wonder whether the
> > barrier is
Am Mittwoch, den 10.01.2018, 15:27 -0500 schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
[...]
>
> If your hardware executes all the vertices in parallel, then a
> barrier should be unnecessary.
My first try for this patch did not include forcing the barrier into
slot x, which in turn resulted in failing piglits, e.g.
On 11 January 2018 at 06:13, Gert Wollny wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, den 10.01.2018, 16:36 +0100 schrieb Gert Wollny:
>> This seems to satisfy the sb optimizer, i.e. no regressions in the
>> piglits compared to disabling sb for tesselation shaders with
>> barriers but enabling
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:50 PM, Connor Abbott wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:27 PM, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:13 PM, Gert Wollny wrote:
>>> Am Mittwoch, den 10.01.2018, 16:36 +0100 schrieb Gert Wollny:
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:27 PM, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:13 PM, Gert Wollny wrote:
>> Am Mittwoch, den 10.01.2018, 16:36 +0100 schrieb Gert Wollny:
>>> This seems to satisfy the sb optimizer, i.e. no regressions in the
>>>
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:13 PM, Gert Wollny wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, den 10.01.2018, 16:36 +0100 schrieb Gert Wollny:
>> This seems to satisfy the sb optimizer, i.e. no regressions in the
>> piglits compared to disabling sb for tesselation shaders with
>> barriers but enabling
Am Mittwoch, den 10.01.2018, 16:36 +0100 schrieb Gert Wollny:
> This seems to satisfy the sb optimizer, i.e. no regressions in the
> piglits compared to disabling sb for tesselation shaders with
> barriers but enabling them in general.
> ---
Actually, it seems this is not enough, at least for
This seems to satisfy the sb optimizer, i.e. no regressions in the piglits
compared to disabling sb for tesselation shaders with barriers but enabling
them in general.
---
The series goes on top of the r600 sb tessellation support patches.
Best,
Gert
src/gallium/drivers/r600/sb/sb_bc.h
11 matches
Mail list logo