[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 11/22] i965: generalize brw_vs_pull_constants in preparation for GS.

[Kenneth Graunke]

On 08/29/2013 10:39 AM, Paul Berry wrote:
> On 28 August 2013 18:06, Kenneth Graunke <kenneth at whitecape.org
> <mailto:kenneth at whitecape.org>> wrote:
>
>     On 08/26/2013 03:12 PM, Paul Berry wrote:
>
>         ---
>            src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw___state.h            |  8 +++
>            src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw___vs_surface_state.c | 66
>         +++++++++++++++---------
>            2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>
>         diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/__brw_state.h
>         b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/__brw_state.h
>         index 4814639..e7a1b40 100644
>         --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/__brw_state.h
>         +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/__brw_state.h
>         @@ -221,6 +221,14 @@ uint32_t
>            get_attr_override(const struct brw_vue_map *vue_map, int
>         urb_entry_read_offset,
>                              int fs_attr, bool two_side_color, uint32_t
>         *max_source_attr);
>
>         +/* brw_vs_surface_state.c */
>         +void
>         +brw_upload_vec4_pull___constants(struct brw_context *brw,
>         +                               GLbitfield64 brw_new_constbuf,
>
>
>     FWIW, brw->state.dirty.brw is only 32-bits currently.  That said,
>     it's probably going to change in the not-too-distant future, so
>     using GLbitfield64 preemptively isn't crazy.
>
>
> Oops, I didn't even realize I did that.  I think I'll change it back to
> GLbitfield, just so that it doesn't cause any confusion for people.

In that case, the next patch uses GLbitfield64 as well...

--Ken