[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 00/10] i965: always mark used surfaces in the visitors

Francisco Jerez currojerez at riseup.net
Thu Nov 5 05:17:43 PST 2015 

Iago Toral <itoral at igalia.com> writes:

> On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 09:19 -0800, Mark Janes wrote:
>> Francisco Jerez <currojerez at riseup.net> writes:
>> 
>> > Iago Toral <itoral at igalia.com> writes:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 15:28 +0200, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> >>> Iago Toral <itoral at igalia.com> writes:
>> >>> 
>> >>> > On Fri, 2015-10-30 at 16:19 +0200, Francisco Jerez wrote:
>> >>> >> Iago Toral Quiroga <itoral at igalia.com> writes:
>> >>> >> 
>> >>> >> > Right now some opcodes that only use constant surface indexing mark them as
>> >>> >> > used in the generator while others do it in the visitor. When the opcode can
>> >>> >> > handle both direct and indirect surface indexing then some opcodes handle
>> >>> >> > only the constant part in the generator and leave the indirect case to the
>> >>> >> > caller. It is all very inconsistent and leads to confusion, since one has to
>> >>> >> > go and look into the generator code in each case to check if it marks surfaces
>> >>> >> > as used or not, and in which cases.
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > when I was working on SSBOs I was tempted to try and fix this but then I
>> >>> >> > forgot. Jordan bumped into this recently too when comparing visitor
>> >>> >> > code paths for similar opcodes (ubos and ssbos) that need to handle this
>> >>> >> > differently because they use different generator opcodes.
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > Since the generator opcodes never handle marking of indirect surfaces, just
>> >>> >> > leave surface marking to the caller completely, since callers always have
>> >>> >> > all the information needed for this. It also makes things more consistent
>> >>> >> > and clear for everyone: marking surfaces as used is always on the side
>> >>> >> > of the visitor, never the generator.
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > No piglit regressions observed in my IVB laptop. Would be nice to have
>> >>> >> > someone giving this a try with Jenkins though, to make sure I did not miss
>> >>> >> > anything in paths specific to other gens.
>> >>> >> 
>> >>> >> Jenkins seems to be mostly happy about the series except for three
>> >>> >> apparent regressions:
>> >>> >> 
>> >>> >>     piglit.spec.arb_fragment_layer_viewport.layer-gs-writes-in-range.bdwm64
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Mmmm... not sure what could be going on with this, at first glance, it
>> >>> > does not look like this test should be affected by this series. The test
>> >>> > does not use any UBOs, does not really check what is written to the FBO,
>> >>> > does not emit texture accesses... Also, there are other tests in
>> >>> > piglit.spec.arb_fragment_layer_viewport that do very similar stuff
>> >>> > (specially the our-of-range test) and those are passing fine.
>> >>> >
>> >>> Odd, I guess it may have been an intermittent failing test that just
>> >>> happens to have failed during your run.  Mark, have you seen any of
>> >>> these fail intermittently by any chance?
>> 
>> This was fixed in https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92744
>> 
>> Ordinarily, all failures/fixes are tracked by commit, and failures due
>> to an old branchpoint are filtered out.  Unfortunately, these failures
>> were intermittent.
>> 
>> If you rebase, you shouldn't see those failures anymore.
>
>
> Thanks Mark! It seems that we don't have regressions then.
>
> Curro, I was thinking in pushing the patches you reviewed so far. I want
> to look into the other patches too (the ones dealing with fb writes,
> textures and shader time), but I got sidetracked with other stuff so
> I'll probably do that later. Is this fine or would you rather postpone
> pushing any of these until we got all these opcodes addressed?
>

Sounds good to me.

> Iago
>
>> >>> 
>> >>> >>     piglit.spec.arb_shader_texture_lod.compiler.tex_grad-texture2dproj-2d-vec4.frag.g965m64
>> >>> >>     piglit.spec.glsl-es-1_00.compiler.structure-and-array-operations.sampler-array-index.frag.g965m64
>> >>> >> 
>> >>> >> The latter two die with a crash so you may be able to look into them
>> >>> >> even if you don't have the original i965 by using INTEL_DEVID_OVERRIDE. ;)
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Unfortunately it seems that these don't break for me with the DEVID
>> >>> > override, that's weird I guess, since they are compiler tests that I can
>> >>> > fully run without INTEL_NO_HW set:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > $ INTEL_DEVID_OVERRIDE=0x29A2 bin/glslparsertest
>> >>> > generated_tests/spec/arb_shader_texture_lod/compiler/tex_grad-texture2DProj-2D-vec4.frag pass 1.10 GL_ARB_shader_texture_lod
>> >>> > Successfully compiled fragment shader
>> >>> > generated_tests/spec/arb_shader_texture_lod/compiler/tex_grad-texture2DProj-2D-vec4.frag: 
>> >>> > PIGLIT: {"result": "pass" }
>> >>> >
>> >>> > $ INTEL_DEVID_OVERRIDE=0x29A2 bin/glslparsertest_gles2
>> >>> > tests/spec/glsl-es-1.00/compiler/structure-and-array-operations/sampler-array-index.frag pass 1.00
>> >>> > Successfully compiled fragment shader
>> >>> > tests/spec/glsl-es-1.00/compiler/structure-and-array-operations/sampler-array-index.frag: 0:21(21): warning: sampler arrays indexed with non-constant expressions will be forbidden in GLSL 3.00 and later
>> >>> > PIGLIT: {"result": "pass" }
>> >>> >
>> >>> Looking at the logs it actually seems to have been an assertion failure:
>> >>> 
>> >>> glslparsertest_gles2:
>> >>> /mnt/space/jenkins/jobs/Leeroy/workspace/repos/mesa/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_live_variables.cpp:112:
>> >>> void brw::fs_live_variables::setup_one_write(brw::block_data*, fs_inst*,
>> >>> int, const fs_reg&): Assertion `var < num_vars' failed.
>> >>> 
>> >>> Did you test it on a debug build?
>> >>
>> >> Yes, it was a debug build.
>> >>
>> >> I also don't see how these patches could break that assertion. The
>> >> assert is related liveness analysis and the number of variables in the
>> >> shader code, but these patches do not change the code we emit (or even
>> >> the number of vgrfs we instantiate), they only move calls to
>> >> brw_mark_surface_used around, which has no relation with the shader code
>> >> at all :-/
>> >>
>> > Yeah, sounds like an unrelated intermittent failure.  Mark, had you seen
>> > this already?
>> >
>> >>> > I tried with most chipsets in between PCI_CHIP_I965_G (0x29A2) and
>> >>> > PCI_CHIP_G41_G (0x2E32).
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Iago
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > Iago Toral Quiroga (10):
>> >>> >> >   i965/fs: Do not mark direct used surfaces in
>> >>> >> >     VARYING_PULL_CONSTANT_LOAD
>> >>> >> >   i965/fs: Do not mark used direct surfaces in
>> >>> >> >     UNIFORM_PULL_CONSTANT_LOAD
>> >>> >> >   i965/fs: Do not mark used direct surfaces in the generator for texture
>> >>> >> >     opcodes
>> >>> >> >   i965/vec4: Do not mark used direct surfaces in
>> >>> >> >     VS_OPCODE_PULL_CONSTANT_LOAD
>> >>> >> >   i965/vec4: Do not mark used direct surfaces in the generator for
>> >>> >> >     texture opcodes
>> >>> >> >   i965/vec4: Do not mark used surfaces in SHADER_OPCODE_SHADER_TIME_ADD
>> >>> >> >   i965/fs: Do not mark used surfaces in SHADER_OPCODE_SHADER_TIME_ADD
>> >>> >> >   i965/vec4: Do not mark used surfaces in VS_OPCODE_GET_BUFFER_SIZE
>> >>> >> >   i965/fs: Do not mark used surfaces in FS_OPCODE_GET_BUFFER_SIZE
>> >>> >> >   i965/fs: Do not mark used surfaces in
>> >>> >> >     FS_OPCODE_FB_WRITE/FS_OPCODE_REP_FB_WRITE
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >  src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.cpp             | 12 ++++++-
>> >>> >> >  src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs.h               |  3 +-
>> >>> >> >  src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_generator.cpp   | 31 -----------------
>> >>> >> >  src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_nir.cpp         | 35 +++++++++++++------
>> >>> >> >  src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_fs_visitor.cpp     | 24 ++++++++-----
>> >>> >> >  src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4.cpp           |  3 ++
>> >>> >> >  src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4_generator.cpp | 19 ----------
>> >>> >> >  src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4_nir.cpp       | 44 +++++++++++++++---------
>> >>> >> >  src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vec4_visitor.cpp   |  7 ++--
>> >>> >> >  9 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 91 deletions(-)
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > -- 
>> >>> >> > 1.9.1
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >>> >> > mesa-dev mailing list
>> >>> >> > mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
>> >>> >> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
>> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 212 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/attachments/20151105/10125b44/attachment.sig>

More information about the mesa-dev mailing list