On 18 January 2016 at 21:16, Józef Kucia jkucia@codeweavers.com wrote:
@@ -909,6 +919,7 @@ static void shader_sm4_read_instruction(void *data, const DWORD **ptr, struct wi ins->handler_idx = WINED3DSIH_TABLE_SIZE; return; }
priv->dst_param[i].modifiers |= instruction_dst_modifier;
This is fine, although I wonder if you considered making saturation an instruction modifier on the wined3d_shader_instruction side instead?
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:39 PM, Henri Verbeet hverbeet@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 January 2016 at 21:16, Józef Kucia jkucia@codeweavers.com wrote:
@@ -909,6 +919,7 @@ static void shader_sm4_read_instruction(void *data, const DWORD **ptr, struct wi ins->handler_idx = WINED3DSIH_TABLE_SIZE; return; }
priv->dst_param[i].modifiers |= instruction_dst_modifier;
This is fine, although I wonder if you considered making saturation an instruction modifier on the wined3d_shader_instruction side instead?
I've considered it but only briefly. It seems to me clearer to apply the saturate modifier to destination parameters in SM4 frontend than to extract the saturate modifier from a destination parameter in SM1 fronted (in order to apply it to a instruction).