On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 14:32:06 -0800, Kenneth Graunke <[email protected]> wrote: > These were only split for historical reasons: brw_wm_constants used to > be the "prepare" step, while brw_wm_constant_surface was "emit". Now > that both happen at emit time, it makes sense to combine them. > > Call the newly combined state atom "brw_wm_pull_constants" to indicate > help distinguish it from the Gen6+ atoms that handle push constants. > > Finally, remove the BRW_NEW_WM_CONSTBUF dirty bit entirely now that it's > never flagged nor used. > > Signed-off-by: Kenneth Graunke <[email protected]> > --- > src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_context.h | 2 - > src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_state.h | 3 +- > src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_state_upload.c | 10 +--- > src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_wm_surface_state.c | 58 ++++----------------- > 4 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
> @@ -357,10 +360,14 @@ brw_upload_wm_pull_constants(struct brw_context *brw)
> }
> drm_intel_gem_bo_unmap_gtt(brw->wm.const_bo);
>
> - brw->state.dirty.brw |= BRW_NEW_WM_CONSTBUF;
> + intel->vtbl.create_constant_surface(brw, brw->wm.const_bo,
> + params->NumParameters,
> + &brw->wm.surf_offset[surf_index]);
> +
> + brw->state.dirty.brw |= BRW_NEW_WM_SURFACES;
> }
>
> -const struct brw_tracked_state brw_wm_constants = {
> +const struct brw_tracked_state brw_wm_pull_constants = {
> .dirty = {
> .mesa = (_NEW_PROGRAM_CONSTANTS),
> .brw = (BRW_NEW_FRAGMENT_PROGRAM),
> @@ -369,49 +376,6 @@ const struct brw_tracked_state brw_wm_constants = {
> .emit = brw_upload_wm_pull_constants,
> };
> -const struct brw_tracked_state brw_wm_constant_surface = {
> - .dirty = {
> - .mesa = 0,
> - .brw = (BRW_NEW_WM_CONSTBUF |
> - BRW_NEW_BATCH),
> - .cache = 0
> - },
> - .emit = upload_wm_constant_surface,
> -};
Looks like BRW_NEW_BATCH got lost in the refactor like in the VS refactor.
pgpAiZDVAvgWM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
