[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 2/2] spirv: handle undefined components for OpVectorShuffle
Juan A. Suarez Romero
jasuarez at igalia.com
Fri Jan 27 08:44:43 UTC 2017
On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 17:08 +0000, Lionel Landwerlin wrote:
> Fixes:
> dEQP-VK.spirv_assembly.instruction.compute.opspecconstantop.vector_related
> dEQP-VK.spirv_assembly.instruction.graphics.opspecconstantop.vector_related*
>
> Signed-off-by: Lionel Landwerlin <lionel.g.landwerlin at intel.com>
> ---
> src/compiler/spirv/spirv_to_nir.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/compiler/spirv/spirv_to_nir.c b/src/compiler/spirv/spirv_to_nir.c
> index 2d773b4373..8f39670f47 100644
> --- a/src/compiler/spirv/spirv_to_nir.c
> +++ b/src/compiler/spirv/spirv_to_nir.c
> @@ -1113,23 +1113,43 @@ vtn_handle_constant(struct vtn_builder *b, SpvOp opcode,
> SpvOp opcode = get_specialization(b, val, w[3]);
> switch (opcode) {
> case SpvOpVectorShuffle: {
> - struct vtn_value *v0 = vtn_value(b, w[4], vtn_value_type_constant);
> - struct vtn_value *v1 = vtn_value(b, w[5], vtn_value_type_constant);
> - unsigned len0 = glsl_get_vector_elements(v0->const_type);
> - unsigned len1 = glsl_get_vector_elements(v1->const_type);
> + struct vtn_value *v0 = &b->values[w[4]];
> + struct vtn_value *v1 = &b->values[w[5]];
> +
> + assert(v0->value_type == vtn_value_type_constant ||
> + v0->value_type == vtn_value_type_undef);
> + assert(v1->value_type == vtn_value_type_constant ||
> + v1->value_type == vtn_value_type_undef);
> +
> + unsigned len0 = v0->value_type == vtn_value_type_constant ?
> + glsl_get_vector_elements(v0->const_type) :
> + glsl_get_vector_elements(v0->type->type);
> + unsigned len1 = v1->value_type == vtn_value_type_constant ?
> + glsl_get_vector_elements(v1->const_type) :
> + glsl_get_vector_elements(v1->type->type);
>
Not sure if this is correct. Rather, I think the test is wrong.
According to OpVectorShuffle spec[1], it is true that it admits as
operands either a constant or an OpUndef.
But what the test does is calling OpSpecConstantOp[2], which is the
operation we are patching here.
And according to the spec, "all Operands must be the <id>s of other
constant instructions", being constant instructions those starting with
OpConstant or OpSpec. In this regard, OpUndef is not a constant.
> assert(len0 + len1 < 16);
>
> unsigned bit_size = glsl_get_bit_size(val->const_type);
> - assert(bit_size == glsl_get_bit_size(v0->const_type) &&
> - bit_size == glsl_get_bit_size(v1->const_type));
> + unsigned bit_size0 = v0->value_type == vtn_value_type_constant ?
> + glsl_get_bit_size(v0->const_type) :
> + glsl_get_bit_size(v0->type->type);
> + unsigned bit_size1 = v1->value_type == vtn_value_type_constant ?
> + glsl_get_bit_size(v1->const_type) :
> + glsl_get_bit_size(v1->type->type);
> +
> + assert(bit_size == bit_size0 && bit_size == bit_size1);
>
> if (bit_size == 64) {
> uint64_t u64[8];
> - for (unsigned i = 0; i < len0; i++)
> - u64[i] = v0->constant->values[0].u64[i];
> - for (unsigned i = 0; i < len1; i++)
> - u64[len0 + i] = v1->constant->values[0].u64[i];
> + for (unsigned i = 0; i < len0; i++) {
> + if (v0->value_type == vtn_value_type_constant)
> + u64[i] = v0->constant->values[0].u64[i];
> + }
> + for (unsigned i = 0; i < len1; i++) {
> + if (v1->value_type == vtn_value_type_constant)
> + u64[len0 + i] = v1->constant->values[0].u64[i];
> + }
>
> for (unsigned i = 0, j = 0; i < count - 6; i++, j++) {
> uint32_t comp = w[i + 6];
> @@ -1143,11 +1163,15 @@ vtn_handle_constant(struct vtn_builder *b, SpvOp opcode,
> }
> } else {
> uint32_t u32[8];
> - for (unsigned i = 0; i < len0; i++)
> - u32[i] = v0->constant->values[0].u32[i];
> + for (unsigned i = 0; i < len0; i++) {
> + if (v0->value_type == vtn_value_type_constant)
> + u32[i] = v0->constant->values[0].u32[i];
> + }
>
> - for (unsigned i = 0; i < len1; i++)
> - u32[len0 + i] = v1->constant->values[0].u32[i];
> + for (unsigned i = 0; i < len1; i++) {
> + if (v1->value_type == vtn_value_type_constant)
> + u32[len0 + i] = v1->constant->values[0].u32[i];
> + }
>
> for (unsigned i = 0, j = 0; i < count - 6; i++, j++) {
> uint32_t comp = w[i + 6];
More information about the mesa-dev
mailing list