[Mesa-dev] [RFC] GL fixed function fragment shaders
dev at lynxeye.de
Thu Jan 13 08:45:32 PST 2011
If we have a reliable ARB shader to glsl ir coverter, we could just
eliminate mesa ir from this chain.
So we should get either glsl->tgsi or arb->glsl->tgsi.
Am Donnerstag, den 13.01.2011, 17:40 +0100 schrieb Roland Scheidegger:
> Am 12.01.2011 23:04, schrieb Eric Anholt:
> > This is a work-in-progress patch series to switch texenvprogram.c from
> > generating ARB_fp style Mesa IR to generating GLSL IR as its product.
> > For drivers without native GLSL codegen, that is then turned into the
> > Mesa IR that can be consumed. However, for 965 we don't use the Mesa
> > IR product and just use the GLSL output, producing much better code
> > thanks to the new backend. This is part of a long term goal to get
> > Mesa drivers off of Mesa IR and producing their instruction stream
> > directly from the GLSL IR.
> > I'm not planning on committing this series immediately, as I've still
> > got a regression in the 965 driver with texrect-many on the last
> > commit.
> > As a comparison, here's one of the shaders from openarena before:
> So what's the code looking like after conversion to mesa IR? As long as
> it's not worse than the original I guess this should be ok, though for
> those drivers consuming mesa IR I guess it's just more cpu time without
> any real benefit? For gallium we should probably address this some way
> or another, it seems quite backward to do ff->glsl->mesa ir->tgsi.
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
More information about the mesa-dev