I prefer some of my GLSL fixes in 1-4 over JP's changes, because they seem cleaner to me. Marek <div class="gmail_extra"> <div class="gmail_quote">On Oct 10, 2016 1:38 PM, "Tapani Pälli" <<a href="mailto:tapani.palli@intel.com">tapani.palli@intel.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> On 10/10/2016 02:27 PM, Marek Olšák wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Tapani Pälli <<a href="mailto:tapani.palli@intel.com" target="_blank">tapani.palli@intel.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> On 10/10/2016 01:38 PM, Marek Olšák wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Marek Olšák <<a href="mailto:maraeo@gmail.com" target="_blank">maraeo@gmail.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Tapani Pälli <<a href="mailto:tapani.palli@intel.com" target="_blank">tapani.palli@intel.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> On 10/08/2016 06:58 PM, Jason Ekstrand wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> FYI, we use ralloc for a lot more than just the glsl compiler so the first few changes make me a bit nervous. There was someone working on making our driver more I undefined-memory-friendly but I don't know what happened to those patches. </blockquote> There's bunch of patches like that in this series: <a href="https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2016-June/120445.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2016-June/120445.html</a> it looks like it just never landed as would have required more testing on misc drivers? </blockquote> We can land at least some of the patches from that series. We still have to replace all non-GLSL uses of DECLARE_RALLOC.. with DECLARE_RZALLOC. </blockquote> BTW, people can still give Rbs on all patches except 5. This rzalloc thing isn't an issue and can be dealt with in a separate series (it can be done after this series lands). </blockquote> I agree these issues do not block review of the series. We just need to make sure it is absolutely safe before landing. As concrete example I got following segfault when I applied this series which is directly related to rzalloc issues. This was with 'shader_freeze' program, description in bug #94477 has link and build instructions for this if you want to try. When I applied JP's patches 4,5,6 (nir, i965_vec4, i965_fs changes) this segfault disappears. </blockquote> I meant that this series is safe to land without patch 5. Did you test it without patch 5? </blockquote> Ah sorry I managed to miss that. Now I did test and when reverting patch 5 this test passes fine. Makes sense to do patch 5 as a separate step when JP's changes land. // Tapani </blockquote></div></div>