Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Testing Out Mesa's GLSL-To-TGSI Translator

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    Plombo
    Senior Member

  • Plombo
    replied
    Originally posted by oibaf View Post
    Will mesa_to_tgsi be removed, then?
    No, it's still needed for assembly and texenv shaders. If Intel ever finishes their work to generate GLSL IR for all the shaders in Mesa, then it could possibly be removed.

    Originally posted by oibaf View Post
    EDIT: Is glsl-to-tgsi still missing the optimizations done in mesa IR? Would porting them to glsl-to-tgsi improve generated shaders?
    The only Mesa IR optimization that I ported to glsl_to_tgsi is simplify_cmp(). But with that said, most of the optimization problems in glsl_to_tgsi were resolved when I wrote a more advanced dead code elimination pass. There is only one Mesa IR optimization missing from glsl_to_tgsi that I've found to actually make a difference in the shader output: the pass that eliminates extra moves to output registers. But that's actually just covering up a problem in the GLSL compiler - the pass should really be implemented there.

    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Yes, but how are Gallium drivers going to make advantage of all the Intel work then? If Mesa IR is completely bypassed, then it can't be used directly.

    Can it be easily ported?
    Which Intel work? The GLSL compiler obviously passes through glsl_to_tgsi just like it does ir_to_mesa. They don't actively do any work on prog_optimize, which contains the Mesa IR optimization passes. If you mean ir_to_mesa, then yes, changes to ir_to_mesa can be easily ported to glsl_to_tgsi. Although Intel doesn't make that many changes to ir_to_mesa; it's mostly bugfixes at this point.
    Plombo
    Senior Member
    Last edited by Plombo; 22 July 2011, 11:09 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • Michael
    Phoronix

  • Michael
    replied
    Originally posted by AnonymousCoward View Post
    Moreover, an article can be 100% grammatically and syntactically correct and still be hard to read or just yuck. Communication and writing are skills. For some people they come natural, while other people could use a little teaching.

    As for any other job, if you want to make a living out of writing articles then I think it's important that you are skilled in what you are doing. I think it would be beneficial, not just for his readers, but also for himself, if Michael would sign up for a writing course.
    The whole issue just comes down to time... Why I quickly run spell check and why I'll just skim through the article as proofreading. Not that I am going through in great detail and then failing, but I simply don't have any more time to spend.

    Leave a comment:

  • AnonymousCoward
    Banned

  • AnonymousCoward
    replied
    Moreover, an article can be 100% grammatically and syntactically correct and still be hard to read or just yuck. Communication and writing are skills. For some people they come natural, while other people could use a little teaching.

    As for any other job, if you want to make a living out of writing articles then I think it's important that you are skilled in what you are doing. I think it would be beneficial, not just for his readers, but also for himself, if Michael would sign up for a writing course.

    Leave a comment:

  • pingufunkybeat
    Senior Member

  • pingufunkybeat
    replied
    Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
    You know, most human brains actualy read the first and last letter in each word, check all the letters in the middle (without being in any order) and then recognise the word.

    If this realy bothers you then I have to wonder how damaged you brain actually is...
    Try that with your next job application.

    Don't forget to mention the "damaged brain" part.

    Leave a comment:

  • archibald
    Senior Member

  • archibald
    replied
    You know, most human brains actualy read the first and last letter in each word, check all the letters in the middle (without being in any order) and then recognise the word.

    If this realy bothers you then I have to wonder how damaged you brain actually is...
    Taht olny wkros if ebvdoyery kowns the croerct slepling to bigen wtih. Just because words can be understood that doesn't make them easy to read.

    Spelling words correctly is surely a good thing - it makes communication easier. It seems clear that to some extent you agree; otherwise why would you put (most of) the letters in the words of your quoted post in the correct order? How do you write your CV?

    With that said, we all come here because it offers us something that we cannot get elsewhere (or possibly not so easily), and for that I think a few typographical errors are a small price to pay

    Leave a comment:

  • V!NCENT
    Senior Member

  • V!NCENT
    replied
    Originally posted by Shining Arcanine View Post
    Proofreading is important. It is unprofessional if there are glaring errors.
    You know, most human brains actualy read the first and last letter in each word, check all the letters in the middle (without being in any order) and then recognise the word.

    If this realy bothers you then I have to wonder how damaged you brain actually is...

    Leave a comment:

  • pingufunkybeat
    Senior Member

  • pingufunkybeat
    replied
    Originally posted by Plombo View Post
    It won't affect it at all. ir_to_mesa is still there, and it isn't going away any time soon.
    Yes, but how are Gallium drivers going to make advantage of all the Intel work then? If Mesa IR is completely bypassed, then it can't be used directly.

    Can it be easily ported?

    Leave a comment:

  • oibaf
    Senior Member

  • oibaf
    replied
    Originally posted by Plombo View Post
    It won't affect it at all. ir_to_mesa is still there, and it isn't going away any time soon.
    Will mesa_to_tgsi be removed, then?

    EDIT: Is glsl-to-tgsi still missing the optimizations done in mesa IR? Would porting them to glsl-to-tgsi improve generated shaders?
    oibaf
    Senior Member
    Last edited by oibaf; 22 July 2011, 03:52 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • smitty3268
    Senior Member

  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by BenderRodriguez View Post
    Is there any wiki explaining pros and cons of this solution?
    Pros vs Cons:

    GLSL IR -> MESA IR -> TGSI

    becomes

    GLSL IR -> TGSI

    So it simplifies gallium by removing an unnecessary step.

    The other benefit is that GLSL IR and TGSI (mostly) support GLSL 1.3, while MESA IR is stuck at the 1.2 level. And no one really seemed interested in adding 1.3 support to it.

    Leave a comment:

  • Plombo
    Senior Member

  • Plombo
    replied
    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Plombo, how is this going to affect the work intel is doing on the GLSL compiler?

    AFAIK, they don't use TGSI, and have no intention of doing it, and are using Mesa IR directly like before.
    It won't affect it at all. ir_to_mesa is still there, and it isn't going away any time soon.

    By the way, Intel has actually moved away from ir_to_mesa for i965 fragment shaders; they wrote a custom IR backend to code generate directly for the GPU without going through Mesa IR. They still use it for i915 and i965 vertex shaders as far as I know, though.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X