[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 14/30] i965/gs: Add GS_OPCODE_URB_WRITE.

Kenneth Graunke kenneth at whitecape.org
Wed Aug 21 11:05:19 PDT 2013


On 08/20/2013 11:30 AM, Paul Berry wrote:
> ---
>   src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_defines.h     |  9 +++++++++
>   src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_eu.h          |  6 ++++++
>   src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_eu_emit.c     |  4 ++--
>   src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_shader.cpp    |  5 ++++-
>   src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4.cpp      |  2 ++
>   src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4.h        |  3 ++-
>   src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4_emit.cpp | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++--
>   7 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_defines.h b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_defines.h
> index 2ab0a2b..16a1dbc 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_defines.h
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_defines.h
> @@ -799,6 +799,15 @@ enum opcode {
>      VS_OPCODE_PULL_CONSTANT_LOAD,
>      VS_OPCODE_PULL_CONSTANT_LOAD_GEN7,
>      VS_OPCODE_UNPACK_FLAGS_SIMD4X2,
> +
> +   /**
> +    * Write geometry shader output data to the URB.
> +    *
> +    * Unlike VS_OPCODE_URB_WRITE, this opcode doesn't do an implied move from
> +    * R0 to the first MRF.  This allows the geometry shader to override the
> +    * "Slot {0,1} Offset" fields in the message header.
> +    */
> +   GS_OPCODE_URB_WRITE,
>   };
>
>   #define BRW_PREDICATE_NONE             0
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_eu.h b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_eu.h
> index ae4cab5..9053ea2 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_eu.h
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_eu.h
> @@ -252,6 +252,12 @@ enum brw_urb_write_flags {
>      BRW_URB_WRITE_COMPLETE = 0x8,
>
>      /**
> +    * Indicates that an additional offset (which may be different for the two
> +    * vec4 slots) is stored in the message header (gen == 7).
> +    */
> +   BRW_URB_WRITE_PER_SLOT_OFFSET = 0x10,
> +
> +   /**
>       * Convenient combination of flags: end the thread while simultaneously
>       * marking the given URB entry as complete.
>       */
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_eu_emit.c b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_eu_emit.c
> index 622b22f..b55b57e 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_eu_emit.c
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_eu_emit.c
> @@ -531,8 +531,8 @@ static void brw_set_urb_message( struct brw_compile *p,
>         insn->bits3.urb_gen7.offset = offset;
>         assert(swizzle_control != BRW_URB_SWIZZLE_TRANSPOSE);
>         insn->bits3.urb_gen7.swizzle_control = swizzle_control;
> -      /* per_slot_offset = 0 makes it ignore offsets in message header */
> -      insn->bits3.urb_gen7.per_slot_offset = 0;
> +      insn->bits3.urb_gen7.per_slot_offset =
> +         flags & BRW_URB_WRITE_PER_SLOT_OFFSET ? 1 : 0;
>         insn->bits3.urb_gen7.complete = flags & BRW_URB_WRITE_COMPLETE ? 1 : 0;
>      } else if (brw->gen >= 5) {
>         insn->bits3.urb_gen5.opcode = 0;	/* URB_WRITE */
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_shader.cpp b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_shader.cpp
> index afa14c5..d3de6ed 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_shader.cpp
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_shader.cpp
> @@ -485,7 +485,7 @@ brw_instruction_name(enum opcode op)
>         return "placeholder_halt";
>
>      case VS_OPCODE_URB_WRITE:
> -      return "urb_write";
> +      return "vs_urb_write";
>      case VS_OPCODE_SCRATCH_READ:
>         return "scratch_read";
>      case VS_OPCODE_SCRATCH_WRITE:
> @@ -497,6 +497,9 @@ brw_instruction_name(enum opcode op)
>      case VS_OPCODE_UNPACK_FLAGS_SIMD4X2:
>         return "unpack_flags_simd4x2";
>
> +   case GS_OPCODE_URB_WRITE:
> +      return "gs_urb_write";
> +
>      default:
>         /* Yes, this leaks.  It's in debug code, it should never occur, and if
>          * it does, you should just add the case to the list above.
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4.cpp b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4.cpp
> index abdf3ab..c978396 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4.cpp
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4.cpp
> @@ -259,6 +259,8 @@ vec4_visitor::implied_mrf_writes(vec4_instruction *inst)
>         return 2;
>      case VS_OPCODE_SCRATCH_WRITE:
>         return 3;
> +   case GS_OPCODE_URB_WRITE:
> +      return 0;
>      case SHADER_OPCODE_SHADER_TIME_ADD:
>         return 0;
>      case SHADER_OPCODE_TEX:
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4.h b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4.h
> index a398f71..c3e2212 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4.h
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4.h
> @@ -627,7 +627,8 @@ private:
>   		     struct brw_reg dst,
>   		     struct brw_reg src);
>
> -   void generate_urb_write(vec4_instruction *inst);
> +   void generate_vs_urb_write(vec4_instruction *inst);
> +   void generate_gs_urb_write(vec4_instruction *inst);
>      void generate_oword_dual_block_offsets(struct brw_reg m1,
>   					  struct brw_reg index);
>      void generate_scratch_write(vec4_instruction *inst,
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4_emit.cpp b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4_emit.cpp
> index 89831de..681dbdd 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4_emit.cpp
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4_emit.cpp
> @@ -399,7 +399,7 @@ vec4_generator::generate_tex(vec4_instruction *inst,
>   }
>
>   void
> -vec4_generator::generate_urb_write(vec4_instruction *inst)
> +vec4_generator::generate_vs_urb_write(vec4_instruction *inst)
>   {
>      brw_urb_WRITE(p,
>   		 brw_null_reg(), /* dest */
> @@ -413,6 +413,21 @@ vec4_generator::generate_urb_write(vec4_instruction *inst)
>   }
>
>   void
> +vec4_generator::generate_gs_urb_write(vec4_instruction *inst)
> +{
> +   struct brw_reg src = brw_message_reg(inst->base_mrf);
> +   brw_urb_WRITE(p,
> +		 brw_null_reg(), /* dest */
> +		 inst->base_mrf, /* starting mrf reg nr */
> +		 src,
> +                 inst->urb_write_flags,
> +		 inst->mlen,
> +		 0,		/* response len */
> +		 inst->offset,	/* urb destination offset */
> +		 BRW_URB_SWIZZLE_INTERLEAVE);
> +}
> +
> +void
>   vec4_generator::generate_oword_dual_block_offsets(struct brw_reg m1,
>                                                     struct brw_reg index)
>   {
> @@ -861,7 +876,7 @@ vec4_generator::generate_vec4_instruction(vec4_instruction *instruction,
>         break;
>
>      case VS_OPCODE_URB_WRITE:
> -      generate_urb_write(inst);
> +      generate_vs_urb_write(inst);
>         break;
>
>      case VS_OPCODE_SCRATCH_READ:
> @@ -880,6 +895,10 @@ vec4_generator::generate_vec4_instruction(vec4_instruction *instruction,
>         generate_pull_constant_load_gen7(inst, dst, src[0], src[1]);
>         break;
>
> +   case GS_OPCODE_URB_WRITE:
> +      generate_gs_urb_write(inst);
> +      break;
> +
>      case SHADER_OPCODE_SHADER_TIME_ADD:
>         brw_shader_time_add(p, src[0], SURF_INDEX_VS_SHADER_TIME);
>         mark_surface_used(SURF_INDEX_VS_SHADER_TIME);
>

I don't like the idea of adding a new opcode - it really seems like we 
should be able to reuse the same one.  I see why you did it, though - 
the number of implied MRF writes is different.

I have a couple of ideas:

1. Do what you did.

(No extra work, doesn't rock the boat...)

2. Encode implied_mrf_writes as a vec4_instruction field.

We did something similar a while back: rather than having a 
fs_inst::regs_written() function that returned a value based on the 
opcode, we switched to encoding it as a member (fs_inst::regs_written), 
since the same opcode may be 4 on Gen5+ but 8 on Gen4.

This would allow us to reuse the same opcode, but set implied_mrf_writes 
to 0 for GS, and 1 for VS.

It might also be nice for the math opcodes, since those currently say 
they have 1 implied MRF write, but on Gen6+ they don't use MRFs at all.

3. Remove implicit g0 -> base_mrf writes altogether.

SEND instructions can only implicitly move g0 to the base MRF on Gen4-5; 
it can't be done on Gen6+.  We could instead do it explicitly, allowing 
the scheduler to move them around.  To avoid regressing Gen4, we could 
add a post-scheduling optimization pass that rewrites "MOV m1 g0; ...; 
SEND m1 ..." and rewrites it to "SEND g0 ...".

This seems like a lot of work, and I don't feel comfortable delaying 
your series to implement this option.



So, I think my preference is for option #2, and my fall back is option 
#1.  What do you think?

--Ken


More information about the mesa-dev mailing list