One more comment:  Could you make a big WIP MR with the whole driver
to act as a pointer to the branch for now?  Then it can be the thing
that gets merged once the stuff in a and b land.

--Jason

On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 12:10 PM Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> wrote:
>
> Good work, all!  I'm super-happy to see another Vulkan driver land in Mesa.
>
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 8:52 AM apinheiro <apinhe...@igalia.com> wrote:
> > Our development branch is ~525 patches on top of master, categorized as 
> > follows:
> >    a) Patches that touch common Mesa infrastructure (NIR, Vulkan WSI, 
> > Meson, etc):  ~5 patches.
> >    b) Patches that touch common Broadcom infrastructure under src/broadcom 
> > (V3D backend compiler mostly): ~20 patches
> >    c) Patches that are independent and specific to the V3D Vulkan driver 
> > (under src/broadcom/vulkan): ~500 patches.
> >
> > Since we are talking about a very large amount of patches, we are expecting 
> > that we can merge most of them without a review, particularly those in c) 
> > that implement the bulk of the Vulkan driver.
>
> I think that's fine.
>
> > The patches in b) are mostly about extending our compiler backend to 
> > support Vulkan intrinsics and requirements as well a a few more general 
> > fixes or improvements. Our plan is to at least have someone in our team 
> > review them internally and grant Rbs, I think the only other person who 
> > might want to review these would be Eric if he has the time and is 
> > interested in doing so. We have sent some of these for early review [1][2] 
> > when we found they were more generic fixes or improvements to the compiler, 
> > but we might not want to do this for each and every one of them unless we 
> > see there is interest in reviewing them separately.
>
> An ACK from Eric or someone other v3d devs would be good.  Not my
> area, though, so I'll let others talk.
>
> > For the patches in a) we would like to at least get an Ack from other Mesa 
> > devs. They are mostly very simple things that just add an option to a NIR 
> > pass or a new intrinsic for use in our driver backend, so maybe it is not 
> > needed to create dedicated MRs and it is fine to just ping specific Mesa 
> > devs for reviews on those patches when we propose the large MR for the bulk 
> > of the driver. We did send one of these as an RFC some time ago [3] and it 
> > would be nice to get some more feedback there if possible.
>
> I'd definitely like to see the patches in a) get real review.  I don't
> know how many MRs you want to make there; do what makes sense.
>
> > Does all this sound sensible?
>
> Yup.
>
> --Jason
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Reply via email to