[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 12/14] mesa/vbo: Move src/mesa/vbo/vbo_exec_array.c -> src/mesa/main/draw.c

[Brian Paul]

On 10/30/2018 11:48 PM, Mathias Fröhlich wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> 
> On Tuesday, 30 October 2018 13:06:50 CET Brian Paul wrote:
>> The series looks great, Mathias.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Brian Paul <brianp at vmware.com>
> 
> Thanks for that one!
> 
>>> @@ -2072,7 +2073,7 @@ vbo_initialize_exec_dispatch(const struct gl_context *ctx,
>>>    void GLAPIENTRY
>>>    _mesa_DrawArrays(GLenum mode, GLint first, GLsizei count)
>>>    {
>>> -   vbo_exec_DrawArrays(mode, first, count);
>>> +   _mesa_exec_DrawArrays(mode, first, count);
>>>    }
>>
>> It would be nice to avoid this pattern of simply calling another
>> function like this.
>>
>> The complication, though, is that the _mesa_exec_Draw*() functions get
>> put into the dispatch table, but the _mesa_Draw*() functions are
>> decorated with GLAPIENTRY since they're Windows dll export functions.
>>
>> We'd have to decorate some entries in the dispatch table with
>> GLAPIENTRY, but that could involve some messy python script work.
> 
> Looking at that, at least both functions _mesa_DrawArrays and
> vbo_exec_DrawArrays/_mesa_exec_DrawArrays have the GLAPIENTRY.
> It's probably the pattern for all of these.
> 
> May be I don't quite understand, but to me that looks just like a naming
> issue that got solved at one point by calling one function from an other?
> And don't all dispatch table functions have the GLAPIENTRY as well as
> the GLvertexformat functions?
> 
>> What do you think?
> Now confused ...

Sorry, I think I was confused about how GLAPIENTRY works with the 
dispatch table. :(

After your series lands, I think we can just remove the current 
_mesa_DrawArrays() function and rename _mesa_exec_DrawArrays() -> 
_mesa_DrawArrays().


> I think it's just a level of indirection that was introduced for a reason
> that went away at one point in the past. May be the reason was just the naming
> that the vbo module used to have these vbo_ prefixes that are changed by this
> patch?

Yeah, possibly.

-Brian