[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 0/6] Constants through builtins evaluation rewrite
galibert at pobox.com
Tue May 8 13:24:28 PDT 2012
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:09:25PM -0700, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> These look great! I've gone ahead and pushed them with a few tiny changes:
> 1. I updated a comment in patch 2, which still said the hash_table
> mapped using variable names/strings.
> 2. I changed the for (exec_node ...) loop in patch 4 to foreach_list, as
> it's simpler.
> This /does/ cause a regression in Piglit test glsl-const-folding-01, due
> to atan(1.0) being slightly off from the value the test expects. But I
> checked that, and it's off in the 5th digit, so it's just a precision
> issue. I think the test is being a bit picky, so we may want to change
Yeah, I sent a patch to the piglit list for that, if that's the way we
want to go. I couldn't find language in the standards about expected
precision from builtin functions, but I can't say I searched very
> Or, make our built-ins more precise. We can do that in a follow-up
> patch sometime.
Yeah. You'll also find that acos(1) is not precise enough for picky
glsl-const-folding-01, hence the other patch I sent to this list.
> Either way, it's definitely a plus that we're using the same code for
> the CPU and GPU side. Much better to be consistent.
> Thanks so much for doing this!
You're welcome :-)
More information about the mesa-dev