On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 6:06 PM Zebediah Figura zfigura@codeweavers.com wrote:
On 11/26/21 13:37, Matteo Bruni wrote:
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 2:46 AM Zebediah Figura zfigura@codeweavers.com wrote:
Signed-off-by: Zebediah Figura zfigura@codeweavers.com
Makefile.am | 1 - libs/vkd3d-shader/hlsl_codegen.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Makefile.am b/Makefile.am index be3d8ec15..4010533af 100644 --- a/Makefile.am +++ b/Makefile.am @@ -290,7 +290,6 @@ XFAIL_TESTS = \ tests/conditional.shader_test \ tests/hlsl-array-dimension.shader_test \ tests/hlsl-bool-cast.shader_test \
tests/hlsl-comma.shader_test \ tests/hlsl-cross.shader_test \ tests/hlsl-duplicate-modifiers.shader_test \ tests/hlsl-for.shader_test \
diff --git a/libs/vkd3d-shader/hlsl_codegen.c b/libs/vkd3d-shader/hlsl_codegen.c index 2c620c7d7..b69df47a0 100644 --- a/libs/vkd3d-shader/hlsl_codegen.c +++ b/libs/vkd3d-shader/hlsl_codegen.c @@ -242,6 +242,38 @@ static void replace_and_remove_node(struct hlsl_ir_node *old, struct hlsl_ir_nod hlsl_free_instr(old); }
+/* Lower casts from vec1 to vecN to swizzles. */ +static bool lower_broadcasts(struct hlsl_ctx *ctx, struct hlsl_ir_node *instr, void *context) +{
- const struct hlsl_type *src_type, *dst_type;
- struct hlsl_ir_expr *cast;
- if (instr->type != HLSL_IR_EXPR)
return false;
- cast = hlsl_ir_expr(instr);
- src_type = cast->operands[0].node->data_type;
- dst_type = cast->node.data_type;
- if (cast->op == HLSL_OP1_CAST
&& src_type->type <= HLSL_CLASS_VECTOR && dst_type->type <= HLSL_CLASS_VECTOR
&& src_type->dimx == 1)
- {
struct hlsl_ir_swizzle *swizzle;
if (!(swizzle = hlsl_new_swizzle(ctx, HLSL_SWIZZLE(X, X, X, X), dst_type->dimx, &cast->node, &cast->node.loc)))
return false;
list_add_after(&cast->node.entry, &swizzle->node.entry);
cast->node.data_type = hlsl_get_scalar_type(ctx, dst_type->base_type);
replace_node(&cast->node, &swizzle->node);
hlsl_src_remove(&swizzle->val);
hlsl_src_from_node(&swizzle->val, &cast->node);
This seems a bit opaque to me. What do you think about the attached change on top of this patch?
Unlike Giovanni I do think that helps :-)
Although at this point I'm more and more inclined to agree with Giovanni's original suggestion, i.e. just create a new node anyway, and get rid of patch 2/6.
Seems fair. Let's see how bad the rebase will be...