[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 2/2] radeonsi: use re-Z

[Michel Dänzer]

On 24.02.2016 19:28, Marek Olšák wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 4:02 AM, Michel Dänzer <michel at daenzer.net> wrote:
>> On 24.02.2016 01:45, Marek Olšák wrote:
>>> From: Marek Olšák <marek.olsak at amd.com>
>>>
>>> This can increase perf for shaders that kill pixels (kill, alpha-test,
>>> alpha-to-coverage).
>>> ---
>>>  src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_shader.h        |  1 +
>>>  src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_state.c         |  6 +++---
>>>  src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_state_shaders.c | 16 +++++++++++++---
>>>  3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_shader.h b/src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_shader.h
>>> index ff5c24d..637d264 100644
>>> --- a/src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_shader.h
>>> +++ b/src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_shader.h
>>> @@ -365,6 +365,7 @@ struct si_shader {
>>>       struct r600_resource            *scratch_bo;
>>>       union si_shader_key             key;
>>>       bool                            is_binary_shared;
>>> +     unsigned                        z_order;
>>>
>>>       /* The following data is all that's needed for binary shaders. */
>>>       struct radeon_shader_binary     binary;
>>> diff --git a/src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_state.c b/src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_state.c
>>> index 2dfdbeb..b23b17a 100644
>>> --- a/src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_state.c
>>> +++ b/src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_state.c
>>> @@ -1339,10 +1339,10 @@ static void si_emit_db_render_state(struct si_context *sctx, struct r600_atom *s
>>>                           sctx->ps_db_shader_control;
>>>
>>>       /* Bug workaround for smoothing (overrasterization) on SI. */
>>> -     if (sctx->b.chip_class == SI && sctx->smoothing_enabled)
>>> +     if (sctx->b.chip_class == SI && sctx->smoothing_enabled) {
>>> +             db_shader_control &= C_02880C_Z_ORDER;
>>>               db_shader_control |= S_02880C_Z_ORDER(V_02880C_LATE_Z);
>>> -     else
>>> -             db_shader_control |= S_02880C_Z_ORDER(V_02880C_EARLY_Z_THEN_LATE_Z);
>>> +     }
>>
>> The switch from LATE_Z to EARLY_Z_THEN_LATE_Z here should either be in a
>> separate change, or at least explained in the commit log or a code
>> comment. With any of that done, this change is
> 
> It doesn't switch from LATE_Z to EARLY_Z_THEN_LATE_Z. It actually
> doesn't change the behavior at all. The bug workaround simply sets
> LATE_Z no matter which mode is preferred.

Ah sorry, looks like I managed to read that part of the patch backwards.
:( The patch is

Reviewed-by: Michel Dänzer <michel.daenzer at amd.com>


-- 
Earthling Michel Dänzer               |               http://www.amd.com
Libre software enthusiast             |             Mesa and X developer