[Mesa-dev] [PATCH v2 2/5] r600: remove custom and incomplete OpenCL code paths

[Marek Olšák]

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 31 May 2017 at 16:32, Marek Olšák <maraeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Jan Vesely <jan.vesely at rutgers.edu> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2017-05-31 at 13:33 +0100, Emil Velikov wrote:
>>>> On 29 May 2017 at 16:33, Marek Olšák <maraeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > The "ac" functions could also be forked and put into r600 if people
>>>> > want to preserve the OpenCL support. That would remove the dependency
>>>> > on "ac".
>>>> >
>>>
>>> I thought amdgpu.a was supposed to be shared by both, is there a way to
>>>  split off the GCN parts and still have reuse shared code?
>>> I won't hide it, my intention is to rely on shared code as much as
>>> possible and force others to care (same strategy with LLVM, but mesa
>>> does not have a nice regression test suite).
>>
>> This shared code doesn't change. You won't gain anything by sharing
>> it.
> This one here. Jan/others can you look into Marek's suggestion, as you
> have time?
>
>> And with ROCm OpenCL being out there, the fate of RadeonSI OpenCL
>> is also uncertain and it's definitely unmaintained.
>>
>>>
>>>> Any objections if we defer this to the person working on r600+OpenCL,
>>>> or is that a must for the series?
>>>> I'm slightly worried that a "fix the build" is going into "refactor
>>>> driver X" :-\
>>>
>>> what's wrong with adding an r600g+opencl on radeonsi dependency? if
>>> it's "not used" enough to be removed, then it should be "not used"
>>> enough to have non-standard dependency.
>>
>> Yeah we can add that dependency.
>>
>> There is technically no production quality OpenCL Mesa driver, so the
>> importance of building OpenCL successfully is kinda moot. Maybe we can
>> just let it be in the current state with all its build bugs.
>>
> If I understood you correctly -> selecting r600+opencl would also
> build radeonsi?
> This sounds like a very nasty hack/workaround :-(
>
> Marek, what's your final call?
> Fwiw I'm still behind "drop this code and let anyone interested do a r600 copy".

My final call is that I'm not a maintainer of r600. :) I'd be OK with
either solution. It's up to you.

Marek