[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 09/12] nir: Add lowering support for packing opcodes.

Jason Ekstrand jason at jlekstrand.net
Thu Jan 28 10:43:57 PST 2016


On Jan 28, 2016 09:22, "Matt Turner" <mattst88 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 12:32 AM, Iago Toral <itoral at igalia.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 15:18 -0800, Matt Turner wrote:
> >> ---
> >>  src/glsl/nir/nir.h                     |  4 ++++
> >>  src/glsl/nir/nir_lower_alu_to_scalar.c | 32
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  src/glsl/nir/nir_opcodes.py            | 10 ++++++++++
> >>  src/glsl/nir/nir_opt_algebraic.py      | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  4 files changed, 66 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/src/glsl/nir/nir.h b/src/glsl/nir/nir.h
> >> index 7b39cbb..bbd5b1a 100644
> >> --- a/src/glsl/nir/nir.h
> >> +++ b/src/glsl/nir/nir.h
> >> @@ -1469,6 +1469,10 @@ typedef struct nir_shader_compiler_options {
> >>     bool lower_ffract;
> >>
> >>     bool lower_pack_half_2x16;
> >> +   bool lower_pack_unorm_2x16;
> >> +   bool lower_pack_snorm_2x16;
> >> +   bool lower_pack_unorm_4x8;
> >> +   bool lower_pack_snorm_4x8;
> >>     bool lower_unpack_half_2x16;
> >>
> >>     bool lower_extract_byte;
> >> diff --git a/src/glsl/nir/nir_lower_alu_to_scalar.c
b/src/glsl/nir/nir_lower_alu_to_scalar.c
> >> index 5372fbe..37cb022 100644
> >> --- a/src/glsl/nir/nir_lower_alu_to_scalar.c
> >> +++ b/src/glsl/nir/nir_lower_alu_to_scalar.c
> >> @@ -134,6 +134,38 @@ lower_alu_instr_scalar(nir_alu_instr *instr,
nir_builder *b)
> >>        return;
> >>     }
> >>
> >> +   case nir_op_pack_uvec2_to_uint: {
> >> +      assert(b->shader->options->lower_pack_snorm_2x16 ||
> >> +             b->shader->options->lower_pack_unorm_2x16);
> >
> > So we only want opt_algebraic to generate these opcodes? Why? I see that
> > this would be the case now, and it is true that there is probably no
> > reason for other IR -> NIR translators to inject these opcodes directly
> > without going through opt_algebraic, but do we need to prevent that with
> > an assert?
>
> Not really necessary to assert, but I certainly don't expect there to
> be other uses of these opcodes.
>
> > I am not against anyway, just curious.
> >
> >> +      nir_ssa_def *word =
> >> +         nir_extract_uword(b, instr->src[0].src.ssa, nir_imm_int(b,
0));
> >> +      nir_ssa_def *val =
> >> +         nir_ior(b, nir_ishl(b, nir_channel(b, word, 1),
nir_imm_int(b, 16)),
> >> +                                nir_channel(b, word, 0));
> >> +
> >> +      nir_ssa_def_rewrite_uses(&instr->dest.dest.ssa,
nir_src_for_ssa(val));
> >> +      nir_instr_remove(&instr->instr);
> >> +      break;
> >> +   }
> >> +
> >> +   case nir_op_pack_uvec4_to_uint: {
> >> +      assert(b->shader->options->lower_pack_snorm_4x8 ||
> >> +             b->shader->options->lower_pack_unorm_4x8);
> >> +
> >> +      nir_ssa_def *byte =
> >> +         nir_extract_ubyte(b, instr->src[0].src.ssa, nir_imm_int(b,
0));
> >> +      nir_ssa_def *val =
> >> +         nir_ior(b, nir_ior(b, nir_ishl(b, nir_channel(b, byte, 3),
nir_imm_int(b, 24)),
> >> +                               nir_ishl(b, nir_channel(b, byte, 2),
nir_imm_int(b, 16))),
> >> +                    nir_ior(b, nir_ishl(b, nir_channel(b, byte, 1),
nir_imm_int(b, 8)),
> >> +                               nir_channel(b, byte, 0)));
> >> +
> >> +      nir_ssa_def_rewrite_uses(&instr->dest.dest.ssa,
nir_src_for_ssa(val));
> >> +      nir_instr_remove(&instr->instr);
> >> +      break;
> >> +   }
> >> +
> >>     case nir_op_fdph: {
> >>        nir_ssa_def *sum[4];
> >>        for (unsigned i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
> >> diff --git a/src/glsl/nir/nir_opcodes.py b/src/glsl/nir/nir_opcodes.py
> >> index be3cd17..3b82c3c 100644
> >> --- a/src/glsl/nir/nir_opcodes.py
> >> +++ b/src/glsl/nir/nir_opcodes.py
> >> @@ -237,6 +237,16 @@ unpack_2x16("unorm")
> >>  unpack_4x8("unorm")
> >>  unpack_2x16("half")
> >>
> >> +unop_horiz("pack_uvec2_to_uint", 0, tuint, 2, tuint, """
> >> +dst = (src0.x & 0xffff) | (src0.y >> 16);
> >> +""")
> >
> > This should've 1 as the output size instead of 0.
>
> I think there's a subtle (and perhaps meaningless) distinction between
> 0 and 1. I think that 0 gives a scalar (uint) while 1 gives a
> 1-component vector. The only difference I've seen is the use of dst vs
> dst.x in the constant evaluation code.
>
> Do you know of any other differences or a reason to prefer 1 over 0?

That's not quite correct. 1 means exactly one component while a destination
size of 0 means that it's a vectorizable operation.  All 0-sized sources
automatically take on the size of the destination.  This is how most
standard ALU opcodes work.

> >> +unop_horiz("pack_uvec4_to_uint", 0, tuint, 4, tuint, """
> >> +dst = (src0.x <<  0) |
> >> +      (src0.y <<  8) |
> >> +      (src0.z << 16) |
> >> +      (src0.w << 24);
> >> +""")
> >
> > Same here.
> >
> >
> >>  # Lowered floating point unpacking operations.
> >>
> >> diff --git a/src/glsl/nir/nir_opt_algebraic.py
b/src/glsl/nir/nir_opt_algebraic.py
> >> index b761b54..56b0f5e 100644
> >> --- a/src/glsl/nir/nir_opt_algebraic.py
> >> +++ b/src/glsl/nir/nir_opt_algebraic.py
> >> @@ -258,6 +258,26 @@ optimizations = [
> >>     (('extract_uword', a, b),
> >>      ('iand', ('ushr', a, ('imul', b, 16)), 0xffff),
> >>      'options->lower_extract_word'),
> >> +
> >> +    (('pack_unorm_2x16', 'v'),
> >> +     ('pack_uvec2_to_uint',
> >> +        ('f2u', ('fround_even', ('fmul', ('fsat', 'v'), 65535.0)))),
> >> +     'options->lower_pack_unorm_2x16'),
> >> +
> >> +    (('pack_unorm_4x8', 'v'),
> >> +     ('pack_uvec4_to_uint',
> >> +        ('f2u', ('fround_even', ('fmul', ('fsat', 'v'), 255.0)))),
> >> +     'options->lower_pack_unorm_4x8'),
> >> +
> >> +    (('pack_snorm_2x16', 'v'),
> >> +     ('pack_uvec2_to_uint',
> >> +        ('f2i', ('fround_even', ('fmul', ('fmin', 1.0, ('fmax', -1.0,
'v')), 32767.0)))),
> >> +     'options->lower_pack_snorm_2x16'),
> >> +
> >> +    (('pack_snorm_4x8', 'v'),
> >> +     ('pack_uvec4_to_uint',
> >> +        ('f2i', ('fround_even', ('fmul', ('fmin', 1.0, ('fmax', -1.0,
'v')), 127.0)))),
> >> +     'options->lower_pack_snorm_4x8'),
> >
> > I think the pack_snorm_* opcodes need a i2u conversion at the end.
> > That's what the GLSL IR lowering is doing and also what the spec [1]
> > seems to indicate:
>
> Right, but since NIR operands are typeless, there's nothing to do (NIR
> doesn't even have i2u/u2i).
> _______________________________________________
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/attachments/20160128/864b58fc/attachment.html>


More information about the mesa-dev mailing list