Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MSAA For Mesa Finally Moves Closer

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by agd5f View Post
    Support for evergreen/cayman and WIP support for 6xx/7xx is available here:
    http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~airlied...og/?h=r600g-ms

    Support for r3xx-r5xx shouldn't be too hard to add. See section 10.8 of the r5xx acceleration programming documentation:
    http://www.x.org/docs/AMD/R5xx_Acceleration_v1.5.pdf
    I'm not a programmer, though I'm slowly starting to build some basic skills, so I don't really understand how the documentation is translated to code. Do you know of walk-through example of this? Like a blog post detailing how a specific feature was implemented (in some level of detail)? It could be an interesting read!

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Paulie889 View Post
      I did read somewhere that MSAA is actually required in GL 3.0 and later? If this is true? I mean Intel has been advertising GL 3 for a while now and the only add MSAA now?
      Idk about "required", but it has been around since like OpenGL 1.5

      Comment


      • #13
        Nouveau.

        Excuse me, but nouveau/nv50,nvc0 have been supporting MSAA for a year now (http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mes...2820b00a9ce667).

        Comment


        • #14
          Michael, this is wrong:
          MLAA in Mesa though is done on the CPU
          It runs entirely on the GPU.

          Of course Mesa as a whole may be cpu-limited, but please don't confuse the two

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by anbog View Post
            I'm not a programmer, though I'm slowly starting to build some basic skills, so I don't really understand how the documentation is translated to code. Do you know of walk-through example of this? Like a blog post detailing how a specific feature was implemented (in some level of detail)? It could be an interesting read!
            For an extremely simple feature (ROUND support), it went something like
            - read the docs to pick a suitable opcode, if it exists
            - check the right file on how the other opcodes around it are implemented, copy-paste a suitable function / add an argument to the handler
            - bind it to that function in the tables for the hw

            And the result:
            http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mes...bfafcd0800f4f8

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by Paulie889 View Post
              I did read somewhere that MSAA is actually required in GL 3.0 and later? If this is true? I mean Intel has been advertising GL 3 for a while now and the only add MSAA now?
              My understanding is that MSAA *is* required for GL 3.0 but this was only realized *after* drivers started advertising 3.0 support.

              I don't think it was just a simple oversight -- IIRC there was some nuance with earlier GL versions where the extension had to be supported but only 1x support was required (which meant that real MSAA support was *not* really needed at that point).

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                My understanding is that MSAA *is* required for GL 3.0 but this was only realized *after* drivers started advertising 3.0 support.

                I don't think it was just a simple oversight -- IIRC there was some nuance with earlier GL versions where the extension had to be supported but only 1x support was required (which meant that real MSAA support was *not* really needed at that point).

                Not sure what changed -- if 3.0 required more than 1x and that was missed, or if there was a realization that the "1x only" interpretation was wrong... or completely unrelated
                Something like undiscovered dependency in package management?

                Comment


                • #18
                  More likely a missed nuance in a 200-page specification...

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                    More likely a missed nuance in a 200-page specification...
                    At least it wasn't one of those nuances filled with double negatives that you have to re-read two dozen times and draw a UML diagram of in order to offer a hypothesis about what the spec is trying to tell you, all while you do your best to suppress a psychotic episode where you fantasize about the authors' demise.

                    Just thinking about it fills me with feelings and emotions that no man should be encumbered with in a professional or academic setting.

                    F

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      BTW, there's no support for MSAA pre-Gen 6 because only Sandy Bridge onwards have hardware for it.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X