[Mesa-dev] [PATCH] tgsi: Add a conditional move inststruction

[Marek Olšák]

FWIW, I think UCMP is a misleading name. Whatever the name will be, it
should be prefixed with "I" or "U", because it's not a floating-point
opcode. How about UCND? :D

Marek


On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Jose Fonseca <jfonseca at vmware.com> wrote:

> There might be some value in renaming UCMP to be MOVC though.  I think
> everybody here can agree that UCMP, though semantically correct, is
> misleading.
>
> Jose
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > Hah, yea, I'm sorry, that's a good point. So movc is a bitcast to
> unsigned
> > followed by ucmp. Alright, I'm withdrawing the patch.
> >
> > z
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > Erm, unsigned < 0 doesn't make sense.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ah indeed!
> > > > >
> > > > > > Definitely what the description says:
> > > > > > static void
> > > > > > micro_ucmp(union tgsi_exec_channel *dst,
> > > > > >            const union tgsi_exec_channel *src0,
> > > > > >            const union tgsi_exec_channel *src1,
> > > > > >            const union tgsi_exec_channel *src2)
> > > > > > {
> > > > > >    dst->u[0] = src0->u[0] ? src1->u[0] : src2->u[0];
> > > > > >    dst->u[1] = src0->u[1] ? src1->u[1] : src2->u[1];
> > > > > >    dst->u[2] = src0->u[2] ? src1->u[2] : src2->u[2];
> > > > > >    dst->u[3] = src0->u[3] ? src1->u[3] : src2->u[3];
> > > > > > }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > or
> > > > > >
> > > > > >    case TGSI_OPCODE_UCMP:
> > > > > >    case TGSI_OPCODE_CMP:
> > > > > >       FOR_EACH_DST_ENABLED_CHANNEL(0, c, tgsi) {
> > > > > >          src0 = fetchSrc(0, c);
> > > > > >          src1 = fetchSrc(1, c);
> > > > > >          src2 = fetchSrc(2, c);
> > > > > >          if (src1 == src2)
> > > > > >             mkMov(dst0[c], src1);
> > > > > >          else
> > > > > >             mkCmp(OP_SLCT, (srcTy == TYPE_F32) ? CC_LT(less than
> 0) :
> > > > > > CC_NE(not equal 0),
> > > > > >                   srcTy, dst0[c], src1, src2, src0);
> > > > > >       }
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > But odd enough, the implementations I happend to look at seemed to
> do
> > > > > "foo
> > > > > >=
> > > > > 0":
> > > >
> > > > Yea, like I mentioned it's pretty broken. Sometimes it's implemented
> as
> > > > UCMP,
> > > > sometimes it's implemented as MOVC.
> > > > It seems to be used only as MOVC.
> > > > It feels silly writing this, but we should probably make UCMP act
> like
> > > > UCMP
> > > > and add MOVC and use it when we need a MOVC.
> > >
> > > Zack, I believe Christoph has a point when he says that UCMP is
> > > semantically
> > > the same as MOVC.
> > >
> > > Because for unsigned integers, "foo > 0" is the same as "foo != 0",
> > > therefore
> > > having UCMP defined as
> > >
> > >   dst = src0 > 0 ? src1 : src2
> > >
> > > or a MOVC as
> > >
> > >   dst = src0 != 0 ? src1 : src2
> > >
> > > is pretty much the same.
> > >
> > > Jose
> > >
> > >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/attachments/20130404/47a88e69/attachment.html>