[Bug 92760] Add FP64 support to the i965 shader backends

bugzilla-daemon at freedesktop.org bugzilla-daemon at freedesktop.org
Tue Mar 1 15:02:26 UTC 2016


--- Comment #59 from Iago Toral <itoral at igalia.com> ---
I think the fp64 is now mostly complete, in the last days we have been going
through the patch set cleaning things up a bit in preparation for review, the
result is in this branch:


FYI, we have also expanded the fp64 piglit tests to cover things that we found
weren't covered by existing tests. There is a branch with these here:


It still needs a rebase and some clean up work, but we should be sending this
for review soon too.

As it is now, we pass all the fp64 tests, except for a few that fail because of
spilling, that could probably take some optimization work to fix. We also have
no regressions in non-double funcionality in any hardware generation that we
have available (gen5 to gen9).

There are still a couple of things that we need to confirm so we can squash or
remove a few patches in the series:

1. We need to make a decision about d2b. We discussed in the list that f2b does
not need to handle denorms and neither does NVIDIA. On the other hand, NVIDIA
does handle d2b with denorms (that is, it returns true for them). Since doubles
are more about precission than performance this could make sense for us too. If
we want this behavior I have a patch for this in the series, following a
similar approach to the one I sento to the list for f2b, (I should get rid of
the resolve_source_modifiers() for gen8 as Jason mentioned for the f2b case):


2. We need to make a decision regarding the scalarization of the lowerings of
trunc() and roundEven() in NIR to use if statements instead of bcsel. For
scalar this seems like a possible win, but for vec4 it probably isn't since we
lose the ability to do vector instructions. See my previous comment for more

With those two questions answered we would have everything ready for review,
the only important thing missing I can think of is spilling. As I mentioned
above there are a few piglit tests that fail because of this, I think this
might be a combination of the spilling code not being able to spill registers
with a size > 1 (at least for vec4) and some needed optimization work, but I
think it is probably a good idea to start the review while we look into this.

With the two questions above pending, the series should be 190+ patches long,
so it is pretty big. The composition looks more or less like this:

1) execsize/width fixes: 9 patches (the ones we sent in December to the list)
2) NIR: ~60 patches
3) i965: ~130 patches

Notice that some of the i965 patches are _required_ after the NIR patches so
that we don't break things in the driver because NIR introduces sized types
that drivers need to handle, even if we don't care about fp64 yet.

Also, as soon as we get sized types in NIR we are going to break drivers that
don't support sized types (freedreno/vc4). I suppose we should ping Eric and
Rob and point them at our branch so they can have some time to fix their
drivers accordingly. We did fix some obvious things for them, but they should
run piglit and probably fix some more stuff.

I suppose we could try to break the series into smaller chunks that make sense
to review individually. Initially I was thinking that we might review the NIR
stuff before the i965 bits... maybe that's a reasonable way to start with this,
including the minimum i965 stuff required to not break non-double things.

Does this make sense to you?

You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-3d-bugs/attachments/20160301/ee9a7b72/attachment.html>

More information about the intel-3d-bugs mailing list