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

[Marek Olšák]

I see. Fair point.

Marek


On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Roland Scheidegger <sroland at vmware.com>wrote:

> Well if the condition is just "any bit set" then it doesn't matter if
> the input is a float or int or whatever (of course, for floats, that
> definition is different than != zero, as it doesn't hold for negative
> zero).
> That would be the same as for instance the bitwise instructions which
> also don't have a "U" or "I" prefix.
>
> Roland
>
> Am 04.04.2013 18:49, schrieb 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
> > <mailto: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 <mailto:
> mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org>
> >     http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mesa-dev mailing list
> > mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130404/8e7e9a07/attachment.html>