On 31 May 2017 at 18:18, Jan Vesely <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 2017-05-31 at 17:48 +0100, Emil Velikov wrote: >> On 31 May 2017 at 16:32, Marek Olšák <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Jan Vesely <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > On Wed, 2017-05-31 at 13:33 +0100, Emil Velikov wrote: >> > > > On 29 May 2017 at 16:33, Marek Olšák <[email protected]> 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". > > I don't understand the delete fervor. The code is rarely touched (this > is the case for most old drivers), because most of the work needed is > on the LLVM side. Since there is no full time dev interested, it's a > very slow process. > If things did not fail to build I would not come near, let alone remove any code.
I have zero knowledge of the code in question and HW/time to make it work I correctly. Since nobody else have come forward with tackling this properly, I opted for this route. Yes it's far from perfect, but it's what we currently have :-\ -Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
