[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 02/28] glsl: move lowering after matching validation

[Anuj Phogat]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 9:00 PM, Timothy Arceri
<timothy.arceri at collabora.com> wrote:
> After lowering the matching flag is_unmatched_generic_inout is lost so
> we need to move this validation before lowering.
> ---
>  src/glsl/link_varyings.cpp | 22 +++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/glsl/link_varyings.cpp b/src/glsl/link_varyings.cpp
> index 9cc77fe..9fe05ca 100644
> --- a/src/glsl/link_varyings.cpp
> +++ b/src/glsl/link_varyings.cpp
> @@ -1640,17 +1640,6 @@ assign_varying_locations(struct gl_context *ctx,
>     hash_table_dtor(consumer_inputs);
>     hash_table_dtor(consumer_interface_inputs);
>
> -   if (!disable_varying_packing) {
> -      if (producer) {
> -         lower_packed_varyings(mem_ctx, slots_used, ir_var_shader_out,
> -                               0, producer);
> -      }
> -      if (consumer) {
> -         lower_packed_varyings(mem_ctx, slots_used, ir_var_shader_in,
> -                               consumer_vertices, consumer);
> -      }
> -   }
> -
>     if (consumer && producer) {
>        foreach_in_list(ir_instruction, node, consumer->ir) {
>           ir_variable *const var = node->as_variable();
> @@ -1700,6 +1689,17 @@ assign_varying_locations(struct gl_context *ctx,
>        }
>     }
>
> +   if (!disable_varying_packing) {
> +      if (producer) {
> +         lower_packed_varyings(mem_ctx, slots_used, ir_var_shader_out,
> +                               0, producer);
> +      }
> +      if (consumer) {
> +         lower_packed_varyings(mem_ctx, slots_used, ir_var_shader_in,
> +                               consumer_vertices, consumer);
> +      }
> +   }
> +
>     return true;
>  }
>
> --
> 2.4.3
>
> _______________________________________________
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

LGTM.
Reviewed-by: Anuj Phogat <anuj.phogat at gmail.com>

Do we have a piglit test hitting this code?